9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt, 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 in the name of M/s. Moon Rock Restaurant and Bar at Bapujinagar, Tadbund, Secunderabad. He was granted a 2B licence on 09.12.2011 for the excise year 01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013 on payment of the annual licence fee. The petitioner submitted an application on 28.06.2012, seeking renewal of the licence within time (before the end of the excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 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 renewal of his licence; and the excess amount paid by the petitioner, if any, should be adjusted from the further licence fee or shall be refunded to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal. 1. 2007 (5) ALD 147 & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt 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) thereof, a licence in Form-2B shall not be granted unless the applicant produces a "Trade Licence" from the local authority concerned for grant of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce. 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 advantage of his own wrong and contend that, not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uing the licence, under Rule 11 in Form 2B, for the excise 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
