Mayfair Hotel Rep. By Its Managing ... vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 15047 Ker

Kerala High Court

Mayfair Hotel Rep. By Its Managing ... vs State Of Kerala on 4 June, 2024

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
   TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 30795 OF 2015


PETITIONER:

         MAYFAIR HOTEL,
         REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
         M.P.JAYASREE,
         W/O. DAMODHARAN NAIR
         SABARI, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD,
         PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25
         BY ADV SRI.P.K.BABU


RESPONDENTS:

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
         EXCISE DEPARTMENT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPUAM-695 001.
    2    THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
         THIRUVANANTHAPUAM-695 001.
    3    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
         ERNAKULAM - 682 018

             SRI.BIMAL K NATH-SR.GP



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.06.2024,     THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 30795 OF 2015

                                  2


                           JUDGMENT

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext. P5

order by which the request of the petitioner for FL 11 licence

rejected under Rule 13 (11B) of the Foreign Liquor Rules on

the ground that there is change of premises.

2. It is revealed from Ext.P5 order that the premises in

which the petitioner had been conducting FL3 licence was

vacated and the petitioner shifted the hotel to a new building

at Pallimukku, Ernakulam. Rule 13 (11B) says the Deputy

Commissioner to issue licence to the hotel where FL3

licence granted was in force as on 31/03/2014.

3. The learned Government Pleader pointed out that the 5th

proviso to Rule 13(3) provides that licence of any bar hotel

that remain defucnt for more than 10 months either during

the period of the validity of the licence or after its expiry shall

not be renewed. He also pointed out that the period of ten

months was originally six months and the same was WP(C) NO. 30795 OF 2015

substituted with the period of 10 months as per amendment

dated 07/01/2021. That apart clause (e) of Rule 13 (11B)

refers to licensed premises which also indicates that the

FL11 licence issued under Rule 13 (11B) shall be with

respect to the same premises in which FL3 licence had been

functioning till 31/03/2014.

4. In view of the aforesaid provisions I find that Ext.P5 is

perfectly valid and legal.

5. Accordingly this writ petition fails and dismissed.

Sd/-

M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE sms WP(C) NO. 30795 OF 2015

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30795/2015

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT FILED BEFORE THE HIGH COURT BY THE PARTIES. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OP(RC) 3367/2013 DATED 11-10-2013 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28-01- 2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25-05-2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.XC6- 17242/2015 DATED 31-07-2015.