Disposed

Berela Lalithamma v. the Excise Commissioner in Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Mar 2023WP/2746/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by a license holder against the Deputy Commissioner of Excise seeking permission to continue business after shifting the premises. Court directed the respondent to permit the petitioner to run the licensed business and not interfere.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.3 to permit the petitioner to run the licensed business as per the order dated 23.01.2023 and not to interfere without following due process of law.

Berela Lalithamma Vs the Excise Commissioner in… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 2746 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 2746 OF 2023 (EXCISE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. BERELA LALITHAMMA, W/O. B. RAM BABU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RAGHAVENDRA BAR AND RESTAURANT CL-9 LICENSEE, NO.21/2, VADDANAHALLI VILLAGE, JAWAGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. G.K. BHAT, SR. COUNSEL FOR;

¶11

SMT. SUDHA D., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER IN KARNATAKA, 2ND FLOOR, TTMC, 'A' BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, HIRIYUR - 577 501.

¶16

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, HIRIYUR - 577 501.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. JYOTHI BHAT, HCGP)

¶19

¶20

WP No. 2746 of 2023

¶21

THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R- 3 TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO CARRY ON THE BUSINESS FORM CL-9 LICENSED BUSINESS AT SY.NO.21/2, VADDANAHALLI VILLAGE, JAVANAGONDANAHALLI HOBLI IN HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT IN TERMS OF THE LICENSE IN FORM CL-9 NO. ES20220624353 DATED 01/07/2022 WHICH IS VALID UP TO 30/06/2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner who is granted with CL-9 license submitted an application with respondent No.3 to permit shifting of the licensed business.

¶25

Respondent No.3 by order dated 23.01.2023 permitted shifting. Such being the case, respondent No.3 has closed the business premises of the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

¶26

Learned HCGP for the respondent-State submits

¶27

that the petitioner is not permitted to run business, since the gram panchayath concerned has withdrawn the occupancy

¶28

¶29

WP No. 2746 of 2023

¶30

certificate granted in favour of the owner of the subject building in question.

¶31

Be that as it may, the petitioner having been granted permission to shift the licensed business, the respondent No.3 is obligated to permit the petitioner to continue the business during the subsistence of the license.

¶32

Accordingly, petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3 to permit the petitioner to run the licensed business, in light of the order dated 23.01.2023 at Annexure-B. Respondent No.3 shall not interfere with the business run by the petitioner without following due process of law.

¶33

Pending I.A.01/2023 does not survive for consideration,

¶34

in view of disposal of the main matter.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

RKA

¶37

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Berela Lalithamma v. the Excise Commissioner in Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Berela Lalithamma v. the Excise Commissioner in Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manjunath Vs the Divisional Controller

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner

The Divisional Controller Vs Sri R H Siddammanavar

Smt M Jayalakshmi Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical)

M/S Hajee a P Bava & Co. Vs the Central Board of Trustees

M/S Fortland Food and Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Excise