The petitioner is conducting a hotel having Heritage classification issued by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India. He has filed this writ petition challenging action initiated by the respondents to cancel his FL-3 licence. The proceedings have been initiated on the ground that, as per the Abkari Policy of the Government of Kerala notified for the year 2014-15 and consequential amendments brought about to the FL-3 Rules, the petitioner's hotel is not entitled to be granted an FL-3 licence. His FL-3 licence for the year 2014-15 had been renewed provisionally and subject to the Abkari Policy to be notified. Accordingly, upon notification of the new Abkari Policy, it is proposed to cancel his FL-3 licence. 2. As already noticed above, the petitioner is a hotel classified as Heritage by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India. He is possessed of all other necessary certificates from the concerned authorities for the continued grant of an FL-3 licence. It is his contention that, he satisfies all the necessary conditions and parameters stipulated by the Abkari Act,1077 as well as the Foreign Liquor Rules, for the purpose of being granted the privilege of conducting a Bar in his hotel. However, his licence is sought to be cancelled for the sole reason that, his hotel has been held to be ineligible to apply for such licence by the Abkari Policy, 2014-2015. The counsel places reliance on the decision in Xaviers Residency v. State of Kerala [2014(4) KLT 419] where a batch of writ petitions challenging the Abkari Policy 2014-2015 were disposed of with the following directions:-
“In the result, it is ordered as follows:-
1. The challenge against the Abkari Policy 2014-2015, by the hotels classified as two star, three star and by hotels having no classification fails. The writ petitions filed by them are therefore dismissed.
2) The Abkari Policy 2014-2015, to the extent, it excludes hotels having Four Star and Heritage category hotels from the eligibility to be granted FL-3 licences under the Foreign Liquor Rules is set aside, being arbitrary and violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. The consequential amendments to the Foreign Liquor Rules as well as the proceedings of the Excise Commissioner cancelling the licences of such hotels are also set aside. The writ petitions filed by them are allowed as above.
3) The Abkari Policy 2014-2015 is sustained in all other respects, except to the extent indicated above.”
Appeals have been filed against the said judgment by the State as well as petitioners in the said writ petitions. All the appeals are pending consideration of the Division Bench. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the appeal of the State has been admitted, the prayer for stay of operation of the judgment has been declined by the Division Bench, after hearing. Therefore, according to the counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner in this case is entitled to the benefit of the dictum in the judgment referred to above. In view of the above, he seeks the issue of a direction to the State as well as the Excise Commissioner commanding them not to cancel his Bar Licence.
3. I have heard the respective counsel appearing for the petitioner in this writ petition as well as the learned Government Pleader who represents the State.
4. In view of the dictum laid down by the judgment in Xaviers Residency v. State of Kerala (supra) that exclusion of Four Star and Heritage hotels from the category of hotels eligible to seek the issue of FL-3 licences by the Abkari Policy 2014-2015 is bad, the petitioner is justified in his contentions. The petitioner is certainly entitled to seek the benefit of the dictum laid down by this Court, the operative portion of which I have already extracted above. The said dictum shall enure to the benefit of the petitioner herein also. In the light of the finding that hotels with Four Star and Heritage classifications are also eligible to be granted FL-3 licences, there is no justification for the cancellation of the petitioner's licence.
In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to restore to the petitioner the Bar licence already issued to him.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE kkj