APHC010644882016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 24682/2016 BETWEEN: 1. B.VISWESWARA RAO, S/o LATE SATYLMARAYANA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS D.No PARVATHIPURAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT LICENSEE OF M/o. HAPPY RESTAURANT AND BAR 2. SMT. A.BHAVANI, W/o. GOWRISHANKAR RAO AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS D.No.28 PARVATHIPURAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT LICENSEE OF M/S HAPPY RESTAURANT AND BAR 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REVENUE EXCISE II DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4. THE PROHIBITION AND EXCISE SUPERINTENDENT, PARVATHIPURAM. VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. Reserved on : Pronounced on : Uploaded on : IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 24682/2016 B.VISWESWARA RAO, S/o LATE SATYLMARAYANA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS D.No. 28-96, MAIN ROAD, PARVATHIPURAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT LICENSEE OF M/o. HAPPY RESTAURANT AND BAR SMT. A.BHAVANI, W/o. GOWRISHANKAR RAO AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS D.No.28-96, MAIN ROAD, PARVATHIPURAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT LICENSEE OF PY RESTAURANT AND BAR ...PETITIONER(S) AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REVENUE EXCISE II DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY THE COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT VIJAYAWADA. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. THE PROHIBITION AND EXCISE SUPERINTENDENT, PARVATHIPURAM. VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 07.01.2026 20.01.2026 22.01.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3330] TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO B.VISWESWARA RAO, S/o LATE SATYLMARAYANA AGED 96, MAIN ROAD, PARVATHIPURAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT LICENSEE OF SMT. A.BHAVANI, W/o. GOWRISHANKAR RAO AGED ABOUT 96, MAIN ROAD, PARVATHIPURAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT LICENSEE OF ...PETITIONER(S) STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REVENUE EXCISE II DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. REP. BY ITS THE COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT VIJAYAWADA. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. THE PROHIBITION AND EXCISE SUPERINTENDENT, ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 2nd respondent issued in Cr. No. 2652/2016/CPE-F3 dated 14.6.2016 and the consequential proceedings issued by the 4th respondent in Rc.No.71/2016/ dated 16.6.2016, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and pass appropriate orders. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G V S MEHAR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE (AP) The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The 2nd respondent Commissioner Prohibition and Excise issued proceedings in Cr.No.2652 /2016 /CPE-F3 dated 14.06.2016 directing the 4th respondent Prohibition and Excise Superintendent to take steps for realisation of an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- on the recommendation of PAC’s of the report of C & AG of India for the year 2008 - 09 and 2014 - 15. The 4th respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.71/2016/A dated 16.06.2016 in-turn has directed the Station House Officer, Parvathipuram to take steps for realisation of the amount as directed by the 2nd respondent on the ground that the licensee holder i.e., M/s. Happy Restaurant and Bar stood as winner in the lottery / drawl conducted by the respondents and Form 2B License was granted for sale of Indian Made Foreign Liquor / Foreign Liquor by Bar to be consumed on the premises of licensee holder. However, the licensee did not provide the PAN for the Firm, hence treating that the M/s. Happy Restaurant and Bar is running under the proprietorship rather than a Partnership Firm, a fact that was revealed during an audit. As a result, above said proceedings were initiated to recover an amount of Rs.3,50,000 from the petitioner. 2. The above proceedings of the 2nd and 4th respondents dated 14.06.2016 and 16.06.2016 respectively were assailed in the writ petition on grounds that Firm has obtained PAN AAEPH-8826 from 4 APBCL, it was stated that one Botu Viswesara Rao a partner, was entered incorrectly in the ICDC, and a detailed representation was made to the respondents outlining all these facts and requesting the cessation of the proceedings. However, the impugned proceedings were issued without regard to the representation. A report that was submitted by the Prohibition and Excise Inspector confirms the Firm's ongoing existence. And it is further stated that rule 17(4) and 17(5) of A.P. Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules 2005 (hereafter for brevity called as rule) apply when two partners hold the license and one of them withdraws or expires, resulting in a change of the Firm’s status from Partnership to Proprietary due to transfer of license or vice-versa. Additionally, it is further contended that no show cause notice was issued prior to the issuance of the impugned proceedings, constitutes a clear violation of principle of natural justice, hence prayed to set aside the impugned proceedings of the 2nd and 4th respondents and to allow the writ petition. 3. The petitioner’s counsel has filed un-registered partnership deed vide Memo in USR No.39803 dated 01.12.2025. And also furnished acknowledgments of Income Tax returns pertaining to years 2016 to 2023 across the bench (part of record) and argued reiterating the facts that it was stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition as stated above. 5 4. It is known law that the partners of the partnership firm have to mandatorily obtain a PAN distinct from the individual PANs of its partners for filing income tax returns of the partnership firm. The PAN card of the firm acts as proof of the firm’s existence. The partners need to submit the partnership deed or the certificate of registration and PAN number for filing income tax returns of the firm. 5. According to the respondents, Income Tax returns that was filed by the counsel across the bench pertaining to years 2016 to 2023 in the name of two individual partners, not in the name of Firm i.e., M/s.Happy Restaurant and Bar. In the representation, the petitioner has mentioned PAN number of the Firm as AAEPH-8826 obtained from APBCL, and it is argued that it was wrongly mentioned one of the names of the partner in the ICDC. 6. As rightly argued by the petitioner’s counsel, the respondents have not issued any show cause notice and called for explanation. And it is further argument of the petitioner’s counsel that the Prohibition and Excise Inspector confirms the Firm's ongoing existence. All these issues has to be addressed by the respondents, hence, the writ petition stands allowed and the impugned proceedings of the 2nd and 4th respondents dated 14.06.2016 and 16.06.2016 respectively are hereby set aside. However, the respondents are not precluded or barred from 6 initiating fresh proceedings by following the process of law after taking the petitioners’ representation into consideration. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 20.01.2026 Harin 7 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO W.P.No. 24682 OF 2016 Date: 20-01-2026 Harin