Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12261 (AP)

V SWAMY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/7297/2025 · 2025-03-25

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010144082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7297/2025 Between: V Swamy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7297/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein in insisting the petitioner to shift the IMFL/FL shop from the premises bearing D.No.64- 35-224/4, Korukonda Road, Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation, East Godavari District after commencing the business in pursuance of the Provisional License by the 4th respondent herein as the said proposed shop is situated contrary to Rule 24(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Selling by shop and Conditions of License) Rule, 2024 without notice and without any order is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principals of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to renew provisional license without insisting shifting of the petitioner’s shop from the present license premises and pass such other order. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted IMFL/FL license. After that the petitioner chosen the premises i.e., D.No.64-35-224/4, Korukonda Road, Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation, East Godavari District. As per the measurements the school is located 450 meters away from the petitioner’s licensed shop and it is within the permissible limits. While things stood thus, respondent Nos.4 and 5 without 3 issuing any notice directed the petitioner to shift the petitioner’s shop from the subject premises. 4. Further learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Rule 24(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2024, the premises shall be at least 100 meters away from the places of public worship, educational institutions and hospitals. In the present case the shop was located 450 meters away from the school. He further submits that as per the procedure contemplated under the Rules to measure the distance from the school to subject shop, they shall conduct survey, after issuing due notice to the petitioner and other stakeholders, if any. But without issuing any notice, the respondents cannot direct orally to shift the shop, contrary to the Rules, 2024. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that the respondents will conduct survey/measurements as per Rule 24(3) r/w 24(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2024. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents and on perusal of the material placed on record, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.4 and 5 not to 4 insist the petitioner to shift the shop without conducting measurements by following due procedure as contemplated under Rule 24(3) r/w Rule 24(5) of Rules, 2024. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed further and pass a speaking order, after issuing notice to the petitioner and after conducting measurements/enquiry in the presence of the petitioner as per the procedure contemplated under the law, within a period of two(2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 25.03.2025 TTPPSS 5 196 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:7297 of 2025 25.03.2025 TTPPSS