Dismissed¶30

Sri. Ravi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jan 2025WP/26266/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CL-9 excise licence transfer; writ of mandamus; maintainability where adverse order (Annexure-A, 31.07.2024) already passed by Deputy Commissioner of Excise; remedy by appeal under Section 61, Karnataka Excise Act, 1965; limitation exclusion from 11.09.2024; Kodagu district; Gandharva Bar and Restaurant, Shirangala; petition dismissed with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 61 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, with the period from 11.09.2024 excluded in computing limitation; Registry directed to return the copy of Annexure-A to the petitioner after retaining the xerox copy. ¶30

Sri. Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:960 WP No. 26266 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 26266 OF 2024 (EXCISE)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI RAVI, S/O KULLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, CL-9 LICENSEE, SY.NO.32/4, SHIRANGALA VILLAGE, KUSHAL NAGAR TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI DHANANJAY B C, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶12

Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER (EXCISE), 2^ND FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING, 'A' BLOCK, BMTC, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560027.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI, KODAGU-571 218.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI MANJUNATH B, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) DIRECT THE R2 TO GIVE PERMISSION TO SHIFT CL-9 TO 3 FEET FROM THE PRESENT PREMISES BEARING SY. NO. 32/6, GANDHARVA BAR AND RESTAURANT, SHIRANGALA, KUSHAL NAGAR,

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:960 WP No. 26266 of 2024

¶19

PANCHAYATH, KODAGU DISTRICT IS REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONER LICENSEE WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD AND ETC.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

This petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus to direct the respondent No.2 to issue permission to shift CL9 to three feet from the present premises, bearing Survey No.32/6, Gandharva Bar and restaurant, Shirangala, Kushal Nagar Panchayat, Kodagu district. Writ of mandamus is also sought to give effect to the communication dated 31.07.2024 marked at Annexure-A.

¶24

It is to be noticed from Annexure-A that

¶25

petitioner’s request for transfer the CL-9 licence to the place mentioned in the application is rejected by the Deputy Commissioner of Excise. Since the order at Annexure-A is not in favour of the petitioner, the writ petition seeking writ of mandamus is not maintainable. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order at Annexure-

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:960 WP No. 26266 of 2024

¶28

A, the remedy for the petitioner is to file an appeal under

¶29

Section 61 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965.

¶30

Reserving such liberty, petition is dismissed. In

¶31

case the appeal is filed, the time spent in prosecuting this petition from 11.09.2024 till this date has to be excluded in computing the period of limitation, if any.

¶32

Registry is directed to return the copy of the Annexure-A to the petitioner, after retaining the xerox copy.

¶33

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

¶34

CHS

¶35

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71

Sri. Ravi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ravi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Samruddi and Company Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt P Sathyaprema Vs the State of Karnataka

The Executive Engineer Vs Revanna

The Senior Divisional Controller Vs Sri Siddalingappa Jyothi

Sri Vasudev Nandlal Jaisingh Vs Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (Bescom)

Chief Manager Vs Govindappa