M/s. Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Traders v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: E.V. VENUGOPAL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-02-26. M/s. Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Traders v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details...
Judgment text
\ [ 32ee I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION N O: 6074 OF 2026 Between: M/s. Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Traders, Rep. by its Propritor Vankudoth Susheela, wo. vankudoth N4urali, Address of business: H. No. 1-1o-2gsl3, Ambedker Nagar, Opposite New market Gate, At Suryapet, Suryapet District. ... PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Enforcement of Prohibition and Excise, At Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 3. The Enforcement of Prohibition and Excise, At Suryapet, Suryapet District. 4. The Station House Officer, Suryapet Prohibition and Excise Station, Suryapet District. 5. The Station House Officer, Suryapet Town Police Station, Suryapet District. 6.
The Station House Officer, Suryapet Rural Police Station, Suryapet District. ... RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an orders, or issue any directions or issue any appropriate writ more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF IVIANDAMUS declaring action of the respondents No. 2 to 6 in harassing by interfering continuously with the business of petitioner in doing black jiggery and alum business under valid license i. e. Registration certificate number 36ALEPV8343A1Z2 in the name and style of M/s. Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Traders situated at H. No.
1 -1O-295t3 Ambedker Nagar, Opposite New market Gate, At Suryapet, Suryapet District, contrary to the memo issued by the 1st respondent and also seizing the black jiggery and alum even though on production of bills and way bills evidencing that it was purchased under bills and transported unde,r way bills and not allowing the petitioner to carry on business in black jiggery and alum, contrary to the memo issued by the 1st respondent which is arbitrary illegal, violation of the principles of natural justice, violation of Article 14, 19 and 21of the Corrstitution of lndia and without any authority of law and consequently direction to the respondents not to interfere or in any manner seize the stocks of black jiggery and alum. l. A. NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.
2 to 6 not to interfere, harass in laMul activities of the petitioner business of black jiggery and alum business doing under valid license i. e. Registration certif icate number 36ALEPV8343A1Z2 in the name and style of [vl/s. Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Traders situated at H. No. 1-10-29513 Ambedker Nagar, Opposite New Market Gate, At Suryapet, Suryapet District pending disposal of main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI LAXMAIAH KANCHANT Counsel for the lRespondent No. 1 to 4: SRI M. ARUN KUMAR, AGP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE Counsel for the lRespondent No. S & 6: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No. 6O74 of 2026 DATE OF ORDER: 26. 02. 2o26 Between: M/s. Sri La><mi Ganapathi Traders ... Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Prohibition & Excise Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and 5 others ...
Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: o.... to pass an orders or fssue anA directions or issue ang appropiate wit more particularlg in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring action of the respondents No. 2 to 6 in harassing by interfeing continaouslg with tf,e business of petitioner in doing black iiggery and alum business under ualid" license i. e. , Registration certificate number 36ALEPV8343A1Z2 in the name and stgle of M/s. Sn Laxmi Ganapathi Traders situated at H. No. 1-1O-295/3 Ambedker Naga4 Opposite New market Gate, at Suryape| Suryapet Distict, contrary to the memo issued bg the 1st respondent and also seizing the black iiggery and alum euen tlwugh on production of bills and utag bills euidencing that it utas purclnsed under bitts and transported under wag bills and not allou. ting t?
e petitioner to carry on business in black iiggery and alum contrary to tle memo issued by tle l"t respondent uhich is Page 2 of3 arbitrarg illegal uiolation of the principres of:. natural justice uiolation of Articles 14, 19 and 2r of the constitution of India and" without any authority of law and consequentlg direction to the respond. ents not ro interfere or in any manner seize the slocfts of btack jiggery and alum.... " 2- The petitioner contends that it is carrying on business as proprietary concern, dealing in jaggery by obtaining required permissio;es from the concerned authorities and that the petitioner is a regular tax payer in respect of its sare of jaggery; that the purchase and sale of jaggery effected by the petitioner is duly discl,csed in the monthly returns filed under the Act; and that the p,etitioner is carrying on business strictly in accordance with the registration/permission obtained by it.
petitioner further c,lntends that while the authorities had granted permissiorL for it to run the business, the respondents are coming to the shop and threatening to close down the business otherwise, they will open rowdy sheet against the petitioner. Petitioner ::urther contends that purchase and sale of jaggery is not prohibited under any of the statute or Regulations made by the State ernd that even as per GUR (Regulation of Use) order, 1968 (for srhort 'the Reguration") as amended by Gazette No. 49 dt. 30-o1-2013 also the Authorities are permitted to enter upon the premisr:s for search, inspect and seize only if the Authorities have reason to believe that any of the provisions of the Regulation are contravened; and that the Authorities without Page 3 of3 any basis, on the pretext of the petitioner selling black jaggery to ID liquor manufacturers by violating the Regrrlation, are interfering with petitioner's right to carry business in lawful manner 3- Mr. M.
Arun Kumar, learned Assistant Government pleader for Prohibition and Excise contends that the petitioner, taking advantage of trade license, is storing, transporting and selling black jaggery without disclosing the details of purchasers and is not producing monthly statement and waybills and thus petitioner has violated the license conditions and Excise Rules. 4- Recording the said submissions, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to interfere with the life and liberty of the petitioner as well as legal trade being carried on by petitioner except in accordance with law. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed SD/. C. DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII G SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secetariate, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. 2. The Enforcement of Prohibition and Excise, At Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 3.
The Enforcement of Prohibition and Excise, At Suryapet, Suryapet District. 4- The Station House Officer, Suryapet Prohibition and Excise Station, Suryapet District. I 5' The station House officer, suryapet rown Police station, suryapet District. 6' The station House officer, suryapet Rural Police Station, suryaiet District. 7. one cc to sRr LAXMATAH KANCHANT, Advocate [opuc] \ 8' Two ccs to GP FoR PRoHlBlrloN & EXCISE, High court for the state of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 9. Two ccs to Gp FoR HOME, High court for the state of rerangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 10. Two CD Copies BSR O. LS , I' HIGH COURT DATED: 26/0212026 \ \ f ( ORDER WP. No. 607'4 of 2026 THE S Y € o . J 1 7 HAR ? rt? E ,? .. r. * ,. t \sF,ut DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT ICOSTS \
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.