- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35214 WP No. 4561 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 4561 OF 2025 (EXCISE) BETWEEN: MUDDURAJ S/O VENKATASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O SAMPANGERE VILLAGE, CHIKKATIRUPATHI VILLAGE PANCHAYAT, ALAMBADI POST - 563 160, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MOHAN MAHABALESHWAR BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND EXCISE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE IN KARNATAKA, TTMC, 2ND FLOOR, BMTC COMPLEX, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR DISTRICT, KUMBARAHALLI, MULABAGIL ROAD, N.H.75, KOLAR - 563 160. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KOLAR DISTRICT, GANDHINAGAR, KOLAR-563160. Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35214 WP No. 4561 of 2025 5. A.M. LAKSHMINARAYAN, S/O. LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, NO.12, MANDAKININILAYA, 1ST BLOCK, KUVEMPU LAYOUT, BETAMANGALA VILLAGE-563 116 K.G.F. TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.WAHEEDA, AGA FPR R1 TO R4; V/O DTD. 28.03.2025-NOTICE TO R5 IS DEFFERED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTION PROHIBITING RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4 FROM GRANTING CL-7 LICENSE TO RESPONDENT NO.5 IN RESPECT OF PREMISES BEARING KHATA NO.425/59/1 AND 2 CHIKKATIRUPATHI VILLAGE PANCHAYAT, ALAMBADI POST, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINRY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "a. Issue a writ in the nature of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction prohibiting the Respondent No.1 to 4 from granting CL-7 License to the 5th Respondent in respect of the premises bearing Khata No. 425/59/1 & 2, Chikkatirupathi Village Panchayat, Alambadi Post, Malur Taluk, Kolar District. b. Consequently, issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the Respondents No.1 to 4 not to grant any license within the distance of 220 meters of the National High Way and etc." - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35214 WP No. 4561 of 2025 2. Sri Mohan Bhat, learned counsel for petitioner submitted, petitioner is resident of Sampangere village, Malur Taluk, Kolar District, which is situated within Chikkatirupathi village panchayath limits. It was submitted, originally land bearing Khatha no.425/59/1 & 2 of Chikkatirupathi village panchayath belonged to one Venkateshappa and Seenappa and that respondent no.5 had obtained lease of said land for running Boarding and Lodging with attached Bar and Restaurant. For said purpose, he had obtained No Objection Certificate and Trade Licence from Chikkatirupathi grama panchayath as per Annexure-A. It was submitted, villagers including petitioner had filed objections before Grama Panchayath and considering same and taking note of fact that they were issued without passing resolution by Panchayath, as per Annexure-F, No Objection and Licence came to be cancelled. 3. Such being case, Excise Inspector had addressed letter dated 16.11.2024 to Grama Panchayath to furnish information whether building was constructed in accordance with law and about authenticity of 'No Objection Certificate' and License, as per Annexure-G. Same indicated that respondents - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35214 WP No. 4561 of 2025 no.1 to 4 were in course of considering application for grant of CL-7 license filed by respondent no.5. It was submitted, premises indicated for same was situated within a distance of 220 Metres from State Highway and as such, barred under Rule 5 of Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967. 4. It was submitted, Hon'ble Supreme Court in its decision in case of State of Tamil Nadu & Ors v. K.Balu & Anr. reported in (2017) 2 SCC 281 had directed not to grant any excise licenses within 500 Metres from outer edge of National/State Highway. Since premises under consideration was within prohibited distance, processing of application by respondents would be contrary to law and therefore, petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition. On said grounds, sought for allowing same. 5. Learned AGA, on instructions would submit that application filed by respondent no.5 for grant of CL-7 license was under process with respondent no.4 having sought for furnishing of documents from respondent no.5. It was submitted that as and when application would be ripe for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35214 WP No. 4561 of 2025 consideration, petitioner's objection about premises being within prohibited distance would be duly considered and appropriate orders would be passed. 6. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition. 7. In view of above and as learned AGA has submitted that respondents no.2 to 4 would duly consider petitioner's objections at time consideration of application filed by respondent no.5, there will be no need for issuance of notice to respondent no.5 of this writ petition. Taking note of submission of learned AGA as above, writ petition is disposed of, directing respondents to verify and consider whether premises wherein respondent no.5 is seeking for grant of CL-7 license is within prohibitory distance from State Highway and would be objectionable and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48