THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 15004 of 2009 ORDER : This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring Cr.No.A1/235/2009/P&ESD, dated 16.07.2009 of the 3rd respondent and Cr.No.7529/09/CPE/G2 dated 15.07.2009 of the 1st respondent, permitting 4th respondent for shifting the licence from Door No.4-1-356, Hanumantekdi, Sultan Bazar, Ward No.16, Hyderabad to Door No.14-8-497, Puranapool, Ward No.49, Hyderabad as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The petitioner is a having a licence No.14/08-10/DPT in Form A4, dated 28.06.2008 issued by the 3rd respondent for conducting retail sale of liquor at D.No.13-3-617, Jiyaguda, Puranapul, Hyderabad, Ward No.44. While so, the 4th respondent is also having licence No.17/08-10/DPT in Form A4, dated 28.06.2008 to do the same business at Ward No.16, Sultan Bazar and he established the shop at Door No.4-1-356, Hanumantekdi, Hyderabad. But, however, on a request made by respondent No.4, his licence premises was shifted from Ward No.16, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad to Ward No.49, Door No.14-8-497, Puranapool/Dhulpet, Hyderabad. The said action was questioned by the petitioner herein in W.P.No.13848 of 2009 and this Court by an order dated 13.07.2009, disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the objections filed by the petitioner and examine the application of the 4th respondent and also with reference to the existence of valid reasons for such shifting and viability aspect before taking a decision thereon as provided for under Rule 29(3) of Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licences) Rules, 2005. 3. It appears that an order was passed by the 1st respondent on 15.07.2009 i.e., two days after pronouncement of the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.13848 of 2009, as of then the petitioner has not filed objections and the said order is without hearing the petitioner, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the present Writ Petition. 4. While issuing rule nisi in the present writ petition, on 27.07.2009, this Court was pleased to suspend the shifting of business premises of respondent No.4 from Ward No.16 to Ward No.49. Subsequently, a vacate stay petition has been filed by respondent No.4. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 6. Now, when the petitioner as well as respondent No.4 has agreed for an enquiry to be conducted by respondent No.1, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 to consider the objections filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. But the same shall be done only after affording an opportunity to the 4th respondent herein. As the 4th respondent has shifted the premises from Ward No.16 of Sultan Bazar to Ward No.49 of Puranapool/Dhoolpet, he shall be permitted to carry on his business during the pendency of the said investigation. The 1st respondent is hereby directed to complete the investigation/enquiry within a period of Four weeks from today. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J August 7, 2009 KSH