IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.39343 of 2014 BETWEEN The Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society, rep. by its President.
AND ... PETITIONER The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner states that it was the existing licencee, who was granted licence No.G/05/2007-08 dated 01.10.2007. However on the ground that there was adulteration found with respect to toddy, the licence was cancelled. The said Managing Committee, however, was subsequently dissolved and new Committee is stated to have been formed after expelling the members of the old Managing Committee, who were involved in adulteration. The new Committee through which the present writ petition is filed is stated to have been constituted on 08.10.2014 and they seek revival of their licence in terms of Rule 39 of the Rules framed under the A.P.Excise (Grant of licence to sell toddy, conditions of licence tapping of Excise Trees) Rules, 2007.
3. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that another applicant has already approached this court in W.P.No.34085 of 2014, wherein there was an interim direction to forward his application to the Commissioner for appropriate consideration.
4. Thus, as of now, there are apparently two applications pending before the Commissioner, viz., the one filed by the petitioner in W.P.No.34085 of 2014 and the application filed by the present petitioner. Since the petitioner herein seeks relief for consideration of his application on merits, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Commissioner to consider the request of the petitioner along with any other request by any other applicant in terms of Excise Act and the Rules and the policy of the State and take appropriate decision in the matter.
With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J December 29, 2014 LMV