IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 13TH MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 921 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.17891/2000 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: -------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESETNED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (TAXES) GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. ASST. EXCISE COMMISSIONER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P. SRI.LAKSHMI NARAYAN RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- S. AMBIKA, SAJEEV BHAVAN KOTTUKAL, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.N.V.AJAYKUMAR, SRI.K.K.RAJEEV SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.921 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge directing the Commissioner of Excise to consider first respondent's application for Bar Licence based on the Abkari policy and Rules and eligibility as on date of making application. The case of the State is that subsequently policy was changed and by virtue of the higher Star status required for the Hotel for Bar Licence, first respondent's Hotel is not entitled. The consistent view taken by this court is that application for Bar Licence should be considered with reference to eligibility as on date of application. Counsel for the first respondent has relied on Division Bench judgment of this court in W.A. No.1478/2003. Even though he cited several other judgments, we do not think there is any need to go into the details of all those judgments because the view taken by this court is rather consistent. We, therefore, decline to interfere in the matter. Consequently Writ 2 Appeal is dismissed. 2. Since the financial year is coming to a close and since the first respondent will be called upon to pay licence fee for the whole year, we feel issue of licence should not be delayed any further. Therefore, there will be direction to the Commissioner to issue the licence, if first respondent is eligible, for this financial year within a week from date of production of copy of this judgment. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms