- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4544 WP No. 9887 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 9887 OF 2022 (EXCISE) BETWEEN: Y. RAMA DEVI, CL-9 LICENSEE, PROPRIETOR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, M/S. MAYURA BAR AND RESTAURANT, NO.46/3, 12TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI C CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV. FOR SRI. MALLA REDDY B V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT (EXCISE), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THE OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, II FLOOR, BMTC COMPLEX, A-BLOCK, BMTC, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT (BUD-4), Digitally signed by BELUR RANGADHAMA NANDINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4544 WP No. 9887 of 2022 II FLOOR, BMTC COMPLEX, A-BLOCK, BMTC, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B MANJUNATH, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT VIDE DTD 21.01.2022 ANNEXURE- A ISSUED BY THE R4 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE R3 AND 4 TO ADJUST/ APPROPRIATE THE LICENSE FEE PAID BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD OF CLOSURE OF BUSINESS, IN THE LICENSING YEARS 01.07.2019 TO 30.06.2020 AND 01.07.2020 TO 30.07.2021, TOWARDS THE LICENSE FEE PAYABLE FOR THE LICENSING YEAR COMMENCING FROM 01.07.2021 TO 30.06.2022. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. 2. This petition is filed seeking writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 21.01.2022 marked at Annexure - A. The petitioner was holding two CL-9 licences during the relevant period and he had paid the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4544 WP No. 9887 of 2022 entire licence fee. Both the licenses were valid for one year and during the subsistence of the said licences, there was COVID-19 pandemic. During the subsistence of one of the licenses, petitioner could not run his business for 3 months 8 days and during the subsistence of the second license, petitioner could not run the business for 4 months and 9 days on account of COVID-19 pandemic related restrictions. 3. In this regard, he filed an application to refund the licence fee on proportionate basis. The representation was not considered. Petitioner filed Writ Petition seeking writ of mandamus. During the pendency of the petition, the authorities considered the representation and issued the endorsement at Annexure - A declining to refund the license fee. Hence, the present petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus as well as writ of certiorari. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that for no fault of his, the petitioner could not continue the business which was permitted in terms of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4544 WP No. 9887 of 2022 CL-9 licence. Since the petitioner had to close down the business on account of COVID-19 pandemic related restrictions, petitioner sustained loss. Thus, he had made a reasonable request to adjust the licence fee that was paid in advance, for next year's renewal fees is the submission. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the closure is not on account of the fault or default on the part of the State. The closure was effected in view of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic and the closure was ordered keeping in mind the larger public interest. He would also refer to Section 21 of Karnataka Excise Act, 1956, which enables the District Magistrate to close such shops if it is necessary for preservation of public peace or prevention of spreading of any infectious diseases. 6. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and perused the records. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4544 WP No. 9887 of 2022 7. There is no denial of the fact that COVID-19 pandemic was unprecedented disaster which has struck the entire world. The State had to act to ensure the safety of the citizens and had to take drastic measures. The Union Government took a decision to clamp lock down and several restrictions were imposed keeping in mind the public safety. The State Government had no option but to act on the direction of the Union Government. The act of the Union Government is also backed by the Statute in a pandemic situation like COVID-19. No doubt the decision might have caused loss to the petitioner in terms of the profit which he would have earned but, that cannot be a ground for the petitioner to seek refund of the licence fee since the decision of the State Government in following the decision of the Union Government cannot be said to be illegal decision. 8. Moreover, whether the petitioner has suffered a loss or not is a question of fact which cannot be adjudicated in the present petition. The authorities are - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4544 WP No. 9887 of 2022 justified in issuing endorsement at Annexure-A and no fault can be found in the act of the State authorities in not permitting the sale of liquors during COVID -19 pandemic. 9. Accordingly, Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BRN, CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31