A SUBBARAMI REDDY Vs. PROHIOBITION EXCISE SUPRENTENDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleaders for Prohibition and Excise; and Home appearing for the respondents.

(2.) In all these Writ Petitions similar contentions have been raised and by different impugned orders, dated 23-07-2007, the licences of the petitioners have been suspended pending enquiry. These Writ Petitions have been filed questioning the said suspension orders passed by the 1st respondent-Superintendent, Prohibition and Excise and to declare the said orders as illegal, against the principles of natural justice, and vioiative of the judgments of this Court.

(3.) Petitioner in W.P. No. 16637 of 2007 is the licencee of M/s Raghava Wines shop No. 3 situated at Durgasamudram village, Tirupathi Rural mandal; petitioner in W.P.No. 16638 of 2007 is the licencee of M/s. Raghava Wines shop No.4 of Pudipatla village, Tirupathi rural mandal; and the petitioner in W.P. No. 16642 of 2007 is the licencee of M/s. Raghava Wines shop No.5 at Pudipatla village in different house numbers. Though all the shops are named M/s Raghava Wines' but the iicencees are different. All the aforesaid three licences have been suspended pending enquiry by the impugned order, dated-23-07-2007, for the following reasons: