- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23253 WP No. 15117 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.15117 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI.GIRISH MALLESH S/O T. MALLESH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.875 IDIGARA STREET HOLENARASIPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT - 573211 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARATH S GOGI.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL N.R. CIRCLE HASSAN DISTRICT - 573201 KARNATAKA STATE …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR A, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO FORTHWITH CONSIDER AND DISPOSE OF THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION DTD 22.01.25 (ANNX-E) IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC. Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23253 WP No. 15117 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who is the proprietor of Eshwari Bar and Restaurant, has approached this Court being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent – City Municipal Council in considering and disposing of his representation dated 22.01.2025 (Annexure-E), wherein he has sought issuance of a Trade Licence in respect of a newly proposed premises. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent Council to expeditiously consider and decide the said representation. 2. This matter has been heard at length on multiple occasions. The core issue that emerges is whether a Trade Licence can be granted by the City Municipal Council in advance for a premises to which the petitioner intends to relocate his existing licensed establishment. There appears to be some uncertainty surrounding the legal necessity or - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23253 WP No. 15117 of 2025 propriety of insisting upon a Trade Licence prior to or contemporaneous with the application for relocation of an Excise Licence. 3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner presently holds a valid Excise Licence in Form CL-9 issued by the Department of Excise, Government of Karnataka, bearing Registration No.150209055. The petitioner contends that, due to practical constraints, operational challenges, and the need to meet evolving market requirements, he is constrained to relocate his establishment to a more suitable and commercially viable location. Consequently, he has sought issuance of a Trade Licence for the proposed new premises, as he apprehends that in the absence of such a licence, his request for renewal and/or relocation of the CL-9 Excise Licence may not be entertained. 4. The apprehension of the petitioner appears to stem from a presumed requirement that a Trade Licence must be furnished at the stage of applying for relocation of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23253 WP No. 15117 of 2025 an Excise Licence. However, no Rule or Regulation under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 or under the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 has been placed on record by the learned counsel for the respondent - City Municipal Council to substantiate such a requirement. 5. Upon perusal of the relevant legal provisions, this Court finds that the shifting of an establishment holding a CL-9 licence is expressly provided for under Rule 23 of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules, 1967’). The said Rule enables the licence-holder to apply for transfer of the licence to a newly designated premises. Once such an application is filed, the competent Excise Authority is bound to consider the request in accordance with Rule 5 of the Rules, 1967, which lays down the procedural requirements and conditions for grant or renewal of such licences. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23253 WP No. 15117 of 2025 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that the requirement of a Trade Licence at the stage of applying for transfer of the Excise Licence under Rule 23 of the Rules, 1967 is not mandatory. The issuance of a Trade Licence is consequential upon the Excise Authority permitting the relocation of the CL-9 licensed premises. In other words, unless and until the competent Excise Authority permits the transfer of the licence to the new premises, the requirement of a Trade Licence in respect of the said premises would not arise. 7. In the present case, since the petitioner has only submitted a representation seeking a Trade Licence and has not yet obtained permission for transfer of the CL-9 licence, this Court is of the view that the writ petition is premature. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to pursue his representation dated 22.01.2025 before the respondent – City Municipal Council provided Excise Authority permits transfer of the CL-9 licence to the new premises in accordance with Rule 23 of the Rules, 1967. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23253 WP No. 15117 of 2025 8. In the event the Excise Authority grants approval for relocation of the CL-9 licence to the proposed premises, it shall be open to the petitioner to pursue his pending application before the respondent - City Municipal Council for issuance of a Trade Licence in respect of the newly designated location. The said application shall then be considered on its own merits, in accordance with law. 9. It is clarified that while considering the petitioner’s application for transfer of the CL-9 licence, the competent Excise Authority shall not insist upon production of a Trade Licence as a pre-condition for such transfer. With the aforesaid observations and liberty reserved, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11