Madras High Court
WP(MD)/22375/2026 of Moon Tower Recreation Club Vs The Additional Chief Secreta on 6 October 2026
WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011084242026}
Moon Tower Recreation Club
Rep by its Secretary, P.Thamaraikannan
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort George, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Prohibition and Excise Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005
3. The Assistant Commissioner
Prohibition and Excise Department,
Collectorate,
Madurai
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned letter issued by the 2nd respondent in Lr. No. P and E
2(4)/4214/2026 dated 09.07.2026 and quash the same.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.K.Gokul
For Respondent(s):
Mr.B.Saravanan
Additional Advocate General
Asst. by Mr.R.Parthiban
Special Government Pleader for R1 to R3
WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The petitioner runs a recreation club. In relation thereto, the petitioner paid the privilege fee of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only). The privilege fee payable for clubs operating in Corporations, other than Chennai City, with a population above 10 lakhs was enhanced under G.O.(Ms). No.38, Home, Prohibition and Excise (VI-2) Department, dated 25.06.2026, which effected an amendment to Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981. By virtue of the said amendment, the privilege fee was enhanced to Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) with effect from 01.04.2026. By impugned communication dated 09.07.2026, the petitioner was called upon to remit the revised privilege fee within thirty days from 13.07.2026.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier privilege fee of Rs.10,00,000/- was remitted by the petitioner prior to the issuance of G.O. (Ms). No.38. Therefore, he submits that the demand to pay the enhanced privilege fee is invalid.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General counters the submission by pointing out that the amendment to the Rule has not been challenged by the petitioner. Since only a consequential communication is challenged in this Writ Petition, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the petition is liable
WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026 to be rejected.
4. G.O.(Ms). No.38 expressly records that the amendments shall be deemed to have come into force on and from 01.04.2026. The impugned communication is consequential to the amendment of the Rule. In these circumstances, the petitioner cannot challenge only the consequential communication without challenging the Rule, including the retrospective operation thereof. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of by leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the amendment in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 06-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No apd
WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026 To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort George, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Prohibition and Excise Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005
3. The Assistant Commissioner Prohibition and Excise Department, Collectorate, Madurai
WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. apd WP(MD) No. 22375 of 2026 06-10-2026