- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15544 WP No. 33479 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.33479 OF 2025 (EXCISE) BETWEEN: M/S. SHREE SAI ENTERPRISES, A REGISTERED FIRM BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER T.H. MUDDUKRISHNAIAH S/O HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT TALAGAWARA, KODIGEHALLI POST, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK-561 203. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SUDHA D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-01. 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER IN KARNATAKA, 2ND FLOOR, TTMC ‘A’ BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15544 WP No. 33479 of 2025 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, BUD-1, NO.62, 3RD FLOOR, 3RD CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, YASHWANTHAPURA INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU-560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH B., AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.09.2025 IN NO.EXE/BUD-1/VA- 1(YA.VA) /SWATHANTRA RVB/05/2023-24 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-N; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO RECONSIDER THE APPLICATION DATED 05.03.2018 OF THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-E. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed seeking to quash the impugned order dated 17.09.2025 passed by respondent No.3 - Deputy Commissioner (Annexure-N) and for a consequential direction to reconsider the petitioner’s application dated 05.03.2018 for grant of licence. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15544 WP No. 33479 of 2025 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submits that against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, there exists an alternative efficacious statutory mechanism provided under Section 61 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (‘the Act’ for short) and the Writ Petition before this Court is not maintainable. 3. The impugned order is passed by the Deputy Commissioner, against which a statutory appeal is provided under Section 61 (2) of the Act and when an alternative efficacious statutory mechanism is provided, writ petition is not maintainable unless exceptional circumstances are made out. In the present case, no exceptional circumstances is demonstrated warranting interference by this Court. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 61(2) of the Act before the competent authority. If such an appeal is filed, the appellate authority shall consider the same in accordance with law without being - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15544 WP No. 33479 of 2025 influenced by any observations made in the impugned order of the Deputy Commissioner. Sd/- ____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67