Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 804 - HC - Indian LawsGrant of licence - establishment of A4 shops/2-B bars - licence denied on the ground that the premises selected by the petitioners falls within 500 meters to the National Highway No.16 - G.O.Ms.No.391, Revenue (Excise-II), Department, dated 18.06.2012 known as Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shops and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2012 and same are amended vide G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 22.03.2017 - Held that: - A perusal of the impugned proceedings goes to show that the Projector Director, NHAI, issued letter dated 16.05.2017 stating that earlier notification was not de-notified, deleting the Visakhapatnam from the NH-16, as such, the applications of the petitioners were rejected. Section 2(3) of the Act of 1956 provides that Central Government may, by like notification, omit any highway from the Schedule and on the publication of such notification, the highway so omitted shall cease to be a national highway. Admittedly, the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways by notification dated 01.05.2015, substituted S.No.49 of Schedule to the Act pertaining to National Highway-16 and Vishakhapatnam does not find place in the Schedule - When once Schedule to the Act as amended by notification dated 01.05.2015 does not contain Vishakhapatnam, question of denotification or omitting as per Section 2(3) of the Act does not arise. Even as per clarification given by Central Government referred to above, de-notification under sub-section 3 of Section 2 of the Act is not required and the particular stretch in S.No.49 pertaining NH -16 omitted in notification S.O.1150 (E), dated 01.05.2015 cannot be treated as National Highway. Since the rejection of applications of the petitioners for grant of A4 shop licences and Form 2-B Bar licences is on the ground that the proposed shops are within 500 meters of National High Ways only, but not State Highways, as such, this court has not expressed any opinion on that aspect. It is for the licencing authority to consider that aspect while reconsidering the applications. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that some of the petitioners carried on business in the same premises and notices were issued for shifting the premises basing on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to supra, several writ petitions were filed, wherein this Court granted interim orders. When once ‘Visakhpatnam’ is not found in Schedule to the Act of 1956, as part of National Highway No.16, rejection of applications of the petitioners on the ground mentioned in the impugned order is erroneous and without any application of mind. Petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
|