This order dismisses multiple pending writ petitions by relying on a Full Bench judgment dated 26.06.2015, which itself followed the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A.P. v. Sharma Goud.
All the writ petitions are dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION Nos. 24392, 31451, 32154 and 34431 of 1997; 4992, 11887, 12626, 13105 and 33387 of 2008; 26031 of 1999; 157, 5214, 12983, 20296 of 2000; 3914, 15545, 19471 and 22266 of 2001; 916, 4954, 8671, 8677, 14483, 15276, 15377, 20378, 22948, 24132, 24776 and 24779 of 2002; 101, 14756, 16948, 24166 and 27067 of 2003; 8157, 8541, 8977, 13875 and 18574 of 2004; 10099 and 26905 of 2006; 15282, 15931, 18073, 19665 and 22120 of 2007; 2502, 4851, 5367, 5405, 6014, 6115 and 9482 of 2008
Date: 12.04.2016
W.P.No.24392 of 1997 Between:
ABT Limited, rep., by its Senior Manager, Tamilnadu.
… Petitioner
And
The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A.P., Hyderabad & another.
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION Nos. 24392, 31451, 32154 and 34431 of 1997; 4992, 11887, 12626, 13105 and 33387 of 2008; 26031 of 1999; 157, 5214, 12983, 20296 of 2000; 3914, 15545, 19471 and 22266 of 2001; 916, 4954, 8671, 8677, 14483, 15276, 15377, 20378, 22948, 24132, 24776 and 24779 of 2002; 101, 14756, 16948, 24166 and 27067 of 2003; 8157, 8541, 8977, 13875 and 18574 of 2004; 10099 and 26905 of 2006; 15282, 15931, 18073, 19665 and 22120 of 2007; 2502, 4851, 5367, 5405, 6014, 6115 and 9482 of 2008
PC: (per the Hon’ble The Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Learned counsel for the petitioners, in all fairness, state that these writ petitions deserve to be dismissed in view of the reference answered by the Full Bench, dated 26.06.2015, in Writ Petition No.20296 of 2000 and batch, following the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, A.P. and another vs. Sharma Goud a[1] .
In the circumstances, all the writ petitions are dismissed following the judgment of the Full Bench, dated 26.06.2015, passed in the aforementioned batch of writ petitions.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, shall also stand closed. There shall no order as to costs.
________________________ DILIP. B. BHOSALE, ACJ
________________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J
Date: 12.04.2016 ES
[1] (2007) 6 SCC 42
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, A.P. and another vs. Sharma GoudFollowed¶15
Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, A.P. and another vs. Sharma Goud
ABT Limited
Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A.P.
DILIP B. BHOSALE
NAVEEN RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
