The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.25603 of 2011 Date: 30-11-2011 Between: K.Pothi Reddy ..... Petitioner AND The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Government of A.P.,Hyderabad and 2 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.V.Satish, for Mr.O.Manohar Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Prohibition & Excise The Court made the following : Order: This Writ Petition is ﬁled for a Mandamus to set aside order in Rc.No.265/2011/B1, dated 07-09-2011, of respondent No.3, whereby he has suspended the petitioner’s license, to sell liquor, for an indeﬁnite period as a measure of substantive penalty in purported exercise of his powers under Section 31 (1) (b) of the A.P.Excise Act, 1968. This Court, on 13-09-2011, granted interim suspension of the said Order, which was extended from time to time. On 02-11-2011, this Court directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- with respondent No.3 and apply to respondent No.1 for compounding the offence. At the hearing, Sri V.V.Satish, learned Counsel, representing Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the sum of Rs.50,000/-, as directed by this Court, was deposited with respondent No.3 and that an application for compounding the alleged offence was also filed before respondent No.1. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, representing the respondents, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner’s application for compounding the oﬀence is pending before respondent No.1. In view of the above subsequent developments, it is not necessary for this Court to decide on the validity of the impugned order. Such an action may arise only in the event the petitioner does not succeed in getting the alleged offence compounded before respondent No.1. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of without going into the merits of the case and with the direction to respondent No.1 to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application for compounding the oﬀence within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till disposal of the petitioner’s application, the impugned order shall not be given eﬀect to. The deposit of Rs.50,000/- made by the petitioner shall be subject to the decision of respondent No.1. As a sequel, interim order, dated 13-09-2011, extended by further orders, is vacated and WVMP.No.3784 of 2011 in/& WPMP.No.31556 of 2011, are disposed of. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 30th November, 2011 LUR