Karnataka High Court
The Principal Secretary To Government vs A S Mahesha on 20 August, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:32346-DB
WA No. 585 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
WRIT APPEAL NO. 585 OF 2025 (EXCISE)
BETWEEN:
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
FINANCE AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT
VIDHANA SOUDHA
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560 001
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
IN KARNATAKA
NO. 27, 2ND FLOOR
TTMC SHANTHINAGAR BUS TERMINAL
Digitally
signed by SHANTHI NAGAR
AMBIKA H B BENGALURU - 560 027
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA - 571 401
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
MANDYA DISTRICT
ABHAKARI BHAVAN
BEHIND OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER
MANDYA - 571 401
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AAG)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:32346-DB
WA No. 585 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
1. A S MAHESHA
S/O LATE M B SONNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
MBS RESIDENCY, PROPOSED CL-7 APPLICANT
KHAT NO. 491
SOMANAHALLI VILLAGE
AKKIHEBBALU HOBLI
K R PET TLAUK 571605
MANDYA DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. G.K. BHAT, SENIOR ADVOCATE
FOR SMT. D. SUDHA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE
WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.01.2025
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN WP No.30789/2024 (EXCISE).
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU ,CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU,CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. For the reasons stated in the application-I.A No.1/2025, the
same is allowed. The delay caused in filing the appeal is
condoned.
NC: 2025:KHC:32346-DB
HC-KAR
2. The State has filed the present appeal impugning an order
dated 10.01.2025 [impugned order] passed by the learned Single
Judge in Writ Petition No.30789/2024 (EXCISE), whereby the
same was allowed.
3. The said petition was filed by the respondent impugning an
order dated 29.10.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner,
Mandya District rejecting the respondent's application for the liquor
licence. The impugned order indicates that the application was
required to be considered by the Deputy Commissioner of Excise
whereas, it was passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mandya,
who was not the concerned authority. The learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the appellants had also
conceded to the said contention. In the aforesaid circumstances,
the learned Single Judge had not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the writ petition.
4. Concededly, the reason for which the petition was allowed is
erroneous. The learned counsel for both the parties submit that
under the Rules, the Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy
NC: 2025:KHC:32346-DB
HC-KAR
Commissioner of Excise are empowered to consider the
application.
5. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and
restore the writ petition before the learned Single Judge for
consideration on merits.
6. The appeal is allowed with consent of the parties.
7. The learned counsel for the parties are also at liberty to
request the learned Single Judge to hear and dispose of the
petition at an earlier date.
8. Pending application also stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(VIBHU BAKHRU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(C M JOSHI)
JUDGE
AHB
