EXCISE COMMISSIONER Vs. K RAJENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Appeal is filed by the Excise Commissioner challenging interim order issued by the learned Single Judge directing him to comply with earlier interim orders dated 4.11.2010 and 22.11.2010, failing which to appear in court on 8.12.2010. We have heard Government Pleader appearing for the appellants. Since we do not find any merit in the WRIT Appeal, we proceed to dispose of the WRIT Appeal without issuing notice to the respondent.

(2.) THE issue raised in the Writ Petition is on the legality and propriety of the action proposed by the Excise Commissioner after inspection. THE respondent running the Bar Hotel has effected some modification of the Bar room and the Restaurant in the form of construction of additional counter in the Bar and sub-division of the Restaurant with a space with Air Condition facility. THE Commissioner is of the view that these modifications are violation of the licence conditions justifying penalty on the respondent and if required, even cancellation of Bar licence. We do not want to consider whether additional counter constructed could be treated as violative of the Rule or other allegations made by the Government Pleader in the Writ Appeal are true and even if true, whether the same justify cancellation of Bar licence. THEse are matters to be considered by the learned Single Judge during final hearing. During pendency of the W.P.(C) the learned Single Judge by interim order dated 4.11.2010 granted a conditional stay against all action proposed by the Commissioner on the respondent remitting Rs.50,000/-. THE respondent complained in this court that the Excise Commissioner disobeyed the court order by not issuing a chalan for remittance of the amount. A petition is filed by the Excise Commissioner before the learned Single Judge for modification of the earlier interim orders, which was rejected by the impugned order appealed in this Writ Appeal.