Allowed

M/s. Kamala Bar and Restaurant, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC24 Aug 2012WA/540/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal, the court addressed the refusal of a license renewal application. While noting the lower court's decision to dismiss the original petition as non-legal, the current bench directed the authorities to consider the appellant's case as a fresh application in accordance with existing policies.

What did the court decide?

Directed authorities to consider the appellant's case as a fresh application for license renewal and pass an order accordingly.

M/s. Kamala Bar and Restaurant, Vs The Government… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶2

WRIT APPEAL NO.540 OF 2012

¶3

Dt: 24-08-2012.

¶4

Between: M/S.KAMALA BAR AND RESTAURANT REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR A.SURESH D.NO.15/250, KAMALA NAGAR, ANANTAPUR .. APPELLANT AND GOVT. OF A.P., REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPT., SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS

¶5

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶6

WRIT APPEAL NO.540 OF 2012

¶7

JUDGMENT: (Per THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE)

¶8

This writ appeal is filed aggrieved by the order of the Hon’ble single Judge dated 28^th March, 2012 in W.P.No.6248 of 2012, which was filed by the petitioner praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing petitioner’s application for renewal of the license for the reasons stated in the impugned order as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to renew the license of the petitioner with immediate effect by taking into account the orders of the 2^nd respondent dated 22.7.2009.

¶9

The Hon’ble single Judge, after considering the facts of the case held that the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Anantapur, consequent to the directions issued by the Court in W.P.No.16194 of 2010 passed an order dated 20.10.2010, issued in Rc.No.335/2010/B, rejecting the application of the petitioner for renewal of license, on the ground that the petitioner did not submit any application for renewal of license for the Excise year 2009-10, and since there was no renewal for 2009-10, the license cannot be renewed for the year 2010-11. In these circumstances, his Lordship was pleased to dismiss the writ petition.

¶10

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order of the Hon’ble single Judge, this writ appeal is filed by the appellant/ writ petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and

¶12

Excise that the appellant/ writ petitioner shall apply before the authorities for renewal of the license and that even if the renewal is not possible by the said authority, they may consider their case as a fresh case in accordance with the provisions of law.

¶13

We do not find that there is any impediment in directing the authorities to consider the case of the appellant/writ petitioner as a fresh case in accordance with the existing policies and pass an order in the matter accordingly.

¶14

We keep it on record that the order passed by the Hon’ble single Judge does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality.

¶15

This writ appeal is disposed of on the above terms.

¶16

( PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, ACJ )

¶17

( VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,

¶18

J )

¶19

Dt: 24-08-2012.

¶20

TNB

M/s. Kamala Bar and Restaurant, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Kamala Bar and Restaurant, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

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

Smt P.Swarna Latha Vs Mukunda Rao

R.Kalpana, Vs The State Bank of India

Jadav Pooja Vs The State Government of A.P.

Mudigonda Durga Prasad, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Campaign for Housing and Tenural Rights (Chatri) Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Asn.Iv)

M/s.Tirumala Stone Crushers, Vs State Bank of India