NEW SRIDHAR WINES Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This common order shall dispose of all the writ appeals and writ petitions mentioned in the cause title portion of the judgment above. At the outset, we may observe that the question raised is repeatedly agitated before this Court by the licencees under the Andhra Pradesh Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970 (the Rules) made under Section 72 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968. Though we appreciate the ingenuity that has been injected into the oral submissions by half-a-dozen able lawyers, we cannot but stick to the discipline of law. For us to decide, the slate is not clean. The issue whether the authorities under the Act (Excise Authorities) can enhance the licence fee during the currency of a licence period in different situations and context is no more res integra by reason of more than a dozen judgments including four Division Bench judgments on the subject. That way, our endeavour and exercise ought to be brief and short.

(2.) All the Appellants and Petitioners in these cases obtained licence in Form IL 24 under Rule 23(xiii) of the Rules. The licence permits selling intoxicating Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor (liquor) in sealed or capsuled bottles, but not for consumption on the licensed premises. Every licensee is required to pay annual licence fee at the rates as shown in the Schedule appended to the Rules. The fee structure for IL 24 licence is graded and depends on the population of village/town/city where the place of licensed shop is situated. For the sake of ready reference, we extract Sl. No. 8 in the schedule relevant for IL 24 licence.

(3.) All the Appellants and Petitioners indisputably obtained licenses for the year 2002-2003. On the ground that the population of the area increased in the 2001 census, the Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise (P&E), issued necessary directions to field officers, namely, Deputy Commissioner and Prohibition & Excise Superintendents (PES), to collect the difference of licence fee. Accordingly the concerned PES issued notices to all the Appellants/Petitioners to pay the difference of licence fee. For example, if the licence fee had been collected at Rs. 3,00,000/- for a place in an area with less than 10,000 population demand was made to pay Rs. 4,50,000/- in view of the increase of population in 2001 census, exceeding 10,000. Aggrieved by the same, Appellants/Petitioners have filed these cases. The learned Judge, who heard a batch of 27 writ petitions, dismissed the cases following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Nellore v. D. Sudhakar Reddy, WA Nos. 1934 of 2001 and Batch, dated 10.6.2003, Ch. V. Ratna Reddy v. Government of A.P. WA No. 1610 of 2002 and batch, dated 31.3.2003 and yet another decision of a Division Bench in Commissioner of P and E v. Mayuri Wines WA No. 1978 of 2002, dated 27.11.2003. Being aggrieved by the judgment of learned Single Judge some of the licensees filed 22 writ appeals. The connected six writ petitions are also tagged on to this batch of cases.