The Court held that suspension of a license pending enquiry is valid and does not require a show-cause notice as it is a privilege governed by license conditions. Consequently, the petitioner's writ petition challenging the suspension was dismissed.
The writ petition was disposed of; the suspension order was confined to six weeks.
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.
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.5654 of 2018
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader from oral instructions on behalf of the respondents and perused the prayer in the writ petition with supporting affidavit and the impugned proceedings, dated 09.02.2018, of the Superintendent, Prohibition and Excise, Narasaraopet, and other material on record.
“…….to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent herein in suspending the license of the petitioner in respect of his A.4 shop M/s.Keerthi Wines bearing L.No.GT/288/2017-19, Atchampet Village & Mandal, Guntur District, A.P. vide Order in Rc.No.26/2018/A4, dated 09.02.2018 of the Superintendent of Prohibition & Excise, Narasaraopet/4th respondent herein without giving opportunity to submit his explanation under Section 31 of A.P. Excise Act as biased, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and unknown to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of license of selling by shop and Conditions of License) Rules, 2012 and also offends the Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the aforesaid Order in Rc.26/2018/A4, dated 09.02.2018 of the Superintendent of Prohibition & Excise, narasaraopet/4th respondent to meet the ends of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
Dr.SSRB, J W.P.No.5654 of 2018
2
1 1984 (2) APLJ Page 1
Dr.SSRB, J W.P.No.5654 of 2018
3
loss of revenue to the Government from the abuse of the licence conditions. The impugned proceeding clearly discloses that the continuation of the shop for violation of the licence conditions and the Rules supra is detriment to the public interest, thereby suspended with immediate effect.
costs.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether suspension of a liquor shop license pending enquiry violates the principles of natural justice and Section 31 of the A.P. Excise Act.
Whether the license suspension order is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tappers Cooperative Society, Maddur v. Superintendent of Excise, MahabubnagarRelied on¶9
Tappers Cooperative Society, Maddur v. Superintendent of Excise, Mahabubnagar
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Keerthi Wines
Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise, Narasaraopet
B. Siva Sankara Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
