Disposed

Sri. K. Cornelius, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Sept 2025WP/27928/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought cancellation of a 2B bar licence allegedly granted within 100 metres of a church, girls' educational institutions and a residential area. The fifth respondent's enquiry found no violation and rejected his representation on 19.08.2025. The court disposed of the petition granting liberty to challenge that rejection, without costs.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to challenge the proceedings dated 19.08.2025; no costs.

Sri. K. Cornelius, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH^{DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN}

¶6

WRIT PETITION N 27928 0F 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

56 K. Cornelius, S/o. K. Uppalaiah,^{Aged about. 53 years,} _Q*,^{Paqtor, lndian} pentecoastal Church of Gdd, Waddepally, Hanamkonda District. R/o. lndian Pentecoastal Chu rch of God,^{Waddepally, Hanamkondar,"rt,"L.}

¶9

r=TlTlON ER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep.^{by its Principal Secretary, Excise Department,} Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner] Prohibition^{and Excise Department, TelanganaState,} Hyderabad.

¶13

T6e Deputy Commissioner,^{Prohibitionand Excise Department, Warangal} Division, Warangal District.

¶14

The District Collector, Warangal^District.

¶15

S. The District Prohibition^{andExcise Officer, Prohibition andExcise} Deoartment. Waranoal Urban, Hanamkonda^.

¶16

Koiagani Mdnoj Kutiar, S/q^{1( RamuluAge{1tQou!.} 15^{ye.qrs,.Occ. Business,} R/o. H.No. 2-g-'993/A^{(MGP FunctionHall)-, NGOs Colony,Waddepally,} Hanamkonda District

¶17

...RES'.NDENT'

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the^{Constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or^{direction more particularlyonein the} nature of 'WRIT OF^{MANDAMUS'or any other appropriate Writ or direction to the} respondent authorities by declaring^{the action of the respondentauthoritiesin} granting License for estabtishment of 2 B Bar at^{house premiseSbearingNo. 2-9-} gg3/A, (MGP Function Halt) in Waddepally, Hanamkonda by the 6th respondent in violation of the Rules the Andhra^{Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Sellingby} Shop and Conditions of^{License)Rules, 2012 and also where the lndian} Pentecoastal Church of God,^{Waddepally, various educational institutions for girls} are located and also residentiat^{areasof Wadddepally as illegal, arbitrary and} violative of Articles 14 and 16^{of the Constitutionof lndiaand alsoagainst the}

¶19

t::) l

¶20

Principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondent authorities to cancel the l-icense granted to the 6th respondent for establishment of the 2 B Bar at house trlo. 2-9-993/A, (MGP Function Hall) in Waddepally, Hanamkonda.

¶21

lA NO: 1OF 21 25

¶22

Petition underSection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents authorities to cancel the License granted to the 6th respondent for establishmr:nt of the 2 B Bar at house No. 2-9-993/A, (MGP Function Hall) in Waddepally, Hanamkonda.

¶23

Counselfor the Petitioner: SRI M.SALEEM Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l TO 5: AGP FOR PROHIBITION EXCTSE Counsel for the Respondent No.6: -

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

1i, I^r.

¶26

;tIi

¶27

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K' LAKSHMAN}

¶28

ON No.^27928OF205 WRIT

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Heardlearnedcounselforthepetitionerandthelearned AssistantGovernmentPleaderforProhibitionandExcise.

¶31

2.^The Petitioner^{herein isseeking adirection tothe 4th} dated^04.08'2025 consider^{rePresentation} respondent^to submittedbyhimduringPrajavani.Accordingtothepetitioner, licensewasgrantedtoaWineShopwhichislocatedwithinloo mtsofchurchpremises,ed'ucationalinstitutionsforgirlsand residential^{area' Therefore' the same is in violationof provisions} ofExciseActandRulesmadethereund.er.Despitereceivingand the^{4tr' resPondentdid not} acknowledging^{the said representation'} the inaction^{of the4th} act upon^{the same' AggrievedbY} respond'ent,^{the petitionerhas filed the presentwrit petition'}

¶32

Whereas,^{learned Assistant GovernmentPleader for} ProhibitionandExcisehasproducedwritteninstructionsof5th respondentwhereinitisstatedthatthe4threspondenthas forwarded^{the representationsubmittedby the petitioner during} Prajavanitothe5threspondentwitharequesttocond"uctenquiry anddisposeofthesaidrepresentation.The5tt,respondenthas

. ,i rti r,

t, i, ii{1i

conducted enquiry and came to know that the allegations made against the said wine Shop are farse and baseless and there is no violation of provisions of the Excise Act and Rules made thereunder white granting permission to the said wine Shop. Therefore, the request made by the petitioner was rejected" by the Sth respondent vide proceedings dated 19.0g.2025 and the copy of the same is furnished to this court as well as to the petitioner,s counsel. The same is placed on record.

¶37

In the light of the above, this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings dated L9.o8.2025. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

Mis<:ellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶39

closed.

¶40

SD/- C.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

ti \

The Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

¶46

The Cc,mmissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶47

Ihq Oe,p!r!y Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Departrnent, Warangal Division, Warangal District.

¶48

4.TheDir;trictCollector,WarangalDistrict..,,,...

¶49

The Di:;trict Prohibition and Excise Officer, Prohibition and Excise

¶50

6 7 Court for the State of 8

PSK. TKS tnA&.

'.:
,t i'. :

i I^ir":.

HIGH COIURT

DATED:1t6/09/2025

ORDER

WP.No.27'928 of 2025

S TA,
1
o
C) :i,. I
2 { JAN 2026
*

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS

¶61

fMc\ 1q[tel^>f

Sri. K. Cornelius, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. K. Cornelius, v. The State of Telangana

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

Didige Jaipal Vs The State of Telangana

Kethavath Ravi Vs The State of Telangana

Y. Krishna Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Sunitha Pittie Vs The State of Telangana

Bandari Anjaiah @ Chakali Anjaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Mohammad Khasim Vs The State of Telangana