IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF sDECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 37998 of 2014 BETWEEN Ashok Kumar Agarwal AND ... PETITIONER The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioners are residents in an apartment complex at premises No.1-5-6/33, Sri Krishna Colony, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. It is stated that the said apartment complex is built by M/s.United Builders of which petitioner No.1 is the Managing Partner. The grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that in the stilt parking of the said apartment complex, respondent Nos.6 and 7 are proposing to open a toddy shop and that they appear to have made an application for grant of licence for Toddy shop by approaching Respondent No.3. The present writ petition is, therefore, filed stating that petitioners have already filed objections on coming to know of such a proposal and are objecting to the said toddy shop on the ground that it cannot be located in a residential complex. Apprehending that licence is likely to be granted to the said respondents, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, states that an application was received from one B.Venu Babu Goud, Chairman of PIC of TTCS, Musheerabad on 03.12.2014 requesting to grant licence at premises No.1-5-6/33 at Sri Krishna Colony, Musheerabad. The said application is stated to have been forwarded by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Musheerabad, to the Station House Officer, Musheerabad, on 06.12.2014 for enquiry and report. It is also stated that the Excise Superintendent has received three complaints viz., one by Atul Kumar, Advocate, dated 06.12.2014, and two complaints by Ashok Kumar Agarwal, dated 08.12.2014. All the said complaints are also forwarded to the Station House Officer for enquiry and report. It was further directed that while considering the proposal, the said complaints are also required to be examined by the Station House Officer. The instructions further state that no proposals are received from the Station House Officer, Musheerabad, and after the report, the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Secunderabad, would personally inspect the proposed premises and shall verify the position with respect to the statutory rules and then only further action can be taken.
4. Evidently, the proposal of establishment of toddy shop is already received and the petitioners have already filed objections, which are also forwarded for consideration to the Station House officer along with the proposal. Since the petitioners claim to be residents of an apartment complex, whether the opening of toddy shop in the stilt parking of such apartment complex is permissible and justified is a matter which the licencing authority has to consider and, therefore, at this stage the adjudication on that aspect, in this writ petition, appears premature as no such decision is taken by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent.
5. Hence, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to consider the said request of the proposed licencee in the light of the objections raised by the petitioners. Respondent No.3 shall also personally inspect the premises and consider the feasibility and permissibility of permitting a toddy shop to be opened in a residential apartment complex. Respondent No.3 is also free to call upon the parties and hear them before taking an appropriate decision in the matter.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J December 12, 2014 LMV