Partly allowed

Hotel Anbagam Residency v. The Commissioner

Madras HC1 Apr 2021WP/8438/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition for refund or extension of a liquor license fee during the lockdown, the Single Judge directed the authority to afford the petitioner a personal hearing before passing orders on the request for fee remission under Rule 24(A).

What did the court decide?

Afforded petitioner an opportunity for personal hearing; directed authority to pass orders on refund request within four weeks.

Hotel Anbagam Residency Vs The Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.04.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶5

Hotel Anbagam Residency, No 5/2, Gajalakshmi Theater Road, Near Valarmathi Bus Stop,

¶6

Tiruppur- 641604 Rep by its Partner,

¶7

MR. Anbagam Tirupathi.

¶8

…Petitioner Vs.

¶9

1.The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

¶10

Cum Licensing Authority, Chepauk,

¶11

Chennai.

¶12

2.The District Manager TASMAC Tiruppur. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ Mandamus to direct the 1^st Respondent to consider the Representation of the Petitioner dated 4.3.2021 seeking for extension of time for running the Liquor Bar FL3 license for a further period of 6 months or in the alternative refund the license fee for the Lock down period from 17.3.2020 to 4.9.2020.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Umapathy

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.R.P.Prathap Singh, Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Mr.R.P.Prathap Singh, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the first respondent and is armed with instructions to proceed finally in this matter. There is no panel counsel available online to accept notice for R2. However, in light of

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

the order that I proposed to pass, notice to R2 may not be necessary.

¶20

I have considered a similar issue as pending before me now, in W.P. Nos.4609 of 2021 and batch where, several petitioners have approached this Court seeking remission of refund/adjustment of the licence and privilege fee for the period 2021-22 as against the licence and privilege fee for the forthcoming years invoking the provisions of Rule 24(A) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981, and directed the first respondent to pass orders granting the refund.

¶21

As regards the adjustment, since the Rule does not expressively provide for adjustment, I have directed the authority to consider the request of the petitioner in this regard. The same order is passed in this case as well. Since the petitioner is desirous of a personal hearing prior to passing orders by the authorities, such opportunity be afforded to the petitioner and orders passed as above within a period of four (4) weeks from today.

¶22

This writ petition is disposed with the aforesaid directions and connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶23

Sd/Assistant Registrar //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sl To 1.The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Cum Licensing Authority, Chepauk, Chennai.

¶24

2.The District Manager TASMAC, Tiruppur. +1cc to Mr.N.Umapathi, Advocate SR.No.21567

¶25

KV(CO) GMY(09/04/2021)

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Hotel Anbagam Residency v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hotel Anbagam Residency v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Season Motors Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)

N.Devendra Gupta Vs The State of Tamilnadu

M/s.Ss Hotels Vs The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

International Asset Reconstruction Vs The Commercial Tal Officer

A.Mohammed Usman Vs The Commissioner

Srs Travels and Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Sales Tax officer