TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OR THE PETITIONER : GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE (TG) FOR THE RESPONDENT : BOLLEPALLI SAI RAM GOUD JUDGMENT: (Per Hon ble The Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition Excise (Telangana) and Sri B. Sai Ram Goud, learned counsel for the respondent - writ petitioner. This appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is preferred by the Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, State of Telangana and the Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise, Secunderabad, against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.39048 of 2012 dated 03.03.2016. The respondent - writ-petitioner herein was granted Form-2B licence for running a Bar-cum-Restaurant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... compliance of the formalities contemplated under Rule 6 only on 09.10.2012 i.e., between the period 1st October and 31st December; the rule was very clear that only 3/4th of the annual licence fee was payable in such circumstances; and the contention that Rule 10(3)(b) of the 2005 Rules was applicable only for fresh licences, and not for renewal of licences, was not tenable. Expressing concurrence with the earlier judgment of this Court, in Sri Venkata Sai Restaurant and Bar, Vemagiri, East Godavari District v. Government of Andhra Pradesh 2007 (5) ALD 147, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition holding that the petitioner was liable only to pay 3/4th of the annual licence fee as per Rule 10(3)(b)(ii) of the 2005 Rules for ren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s incumbent on the applicant to satisfy all the conditions envisaged in Rule 6 for grant of licence; what is required for granting a fresh licence is equally required for grant of renewal; an applicant seeking renewal of the Form-2B licence has necessarily to comply with all the conditions envisaged in Rule 6; and, as such, production of proof of payment of the trade licence fee, for the current year, was the sine qua non for renewal of the Form 2B licence. The 2005 Rules were made in the exercise of the powers conferred by Section 72 read with Sections 17, 28 and 29 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968, and are statutory in character. Rule 6 places certain restrictions on the grant of licence and, under Sub-Rule (1)(v) t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eby he was required to submit a trade licence. Having failed to submit a trade licence and, as he himself was the cause for the delay in renewal of the licence, the respondent - writ petitioner cannot now be heard to contend that, since the licence was renewed only in the second quarter i.e., on 09.10.2012, Rule 10 (3) (b) (ii) would require him to pay only 3/4th of the annual licence fee. The requirement of payment of only 3/4th of the annual licence fee would arise if the appellants were at fault in not renewing the licence within time, despite the respondent - writ petitioner having complied with all the conditions stipulated in the 2005 Rules. A person, who is himself responsible for the delay in the grant of renewal, cannot take advant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2006-07; and it was only on 05.10.2006, that a licence was granted for the excise year 01.07.2006 to 30.06.2007. It is in such circumstances that the learned Single Judge, relying on Rule 10(3)(b) of the 2005 Rules, held that the licensee was liable to pay only 3/4th of the annual licence fee; and he was not liable to pay the licence fee for the first quarter. It is necessary to note that both these judgments, in Sri Venkata Sai Restaurant and Bar1 and M.Harikiran (judgment in W.P. No.23415 of 2005 dated 25.04.2006), were rendered prior to the amendment of the 2005 Rules, and insertion of Rule 9-A therein vide G.O. Ms. No.868 dated 21.06.2007. A specific Rule has been inserted w.e.f. 21.06.2007 for grant of renewal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
