RATHNAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri Lakamapurmath Chidanandayya, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.13468/2022.

(2.) Ordinarily, we would have relegated the petitioners to avail of the alternative remedy under Sec. 61 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, however, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a pure question of law arises for consideration in these petitions. It has been contended that shifting of liquor shop from one Taluk to another Taluk is not permissible under Rule 23 of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short).

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that if the aforesaid Rule is read in its entirety, such a shifting within the District is permissible on an order made by the Deputy Commissioner.