Court elevates hotel status to 'Five Star Deluxe' pending license decision, orders quick action.

The High Court recognized the petitioner's hotel as a 'Five Star Deluxe' following an inspection by the competent authority. The court directed the Excise Commissioner to consider the petitioner's upgraded status and ordered maintenance of the status quo regarding the FL-3 license until a decision was reached. The court instructed the Commissioner to take action within one month, ensuring a fair hearing for the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of, with the petitioner required to provide relevant documents to the Commissioner for further action.

---

---

Issues:
1. Classification of the hotel as 'Five Star Deluxe'
2. Impact of Ext.P17 order on FL-3 license
3. Consideration of petitioner's status and appropriate orders

Classification of the hotel as 'Five Star Deluxe':
The petitioner's hotel, previously classified as a 'Three Star Hotel,' applied for an upgrade to 'Five Star Deluxe.' After an inspection by the competent authority under the Union of India, the hotel's status was elevated to 'Five Star Deluxe' as per Ext.P18 proceedings. The classification was valid from 29.9.2014 to 28.09.2019. The petitioner sought to continue serving liquor based on this new classification.

Impact of Ext.P17 order on FL-3 license:
The Commissioner of Excise issued Ext.P17 order as part of the 'Abkari Policy 2014-2015,' directing the closure of all Bar Hotels in Kerala except those classified as 'Five Star and above.' The petitioner expressed concern that Ext.P17 might lead to the closure of their hotel despite the upgraded classification. However, the Ext.P17 order had not yet come into force, and the matter was brought before the High Court for a final decision.

Consideration of petitioner's status and appropriate orders:
The High Court acknowledged the petitioner's new classification as a 'Five Star Deluxe' hotel and directed the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's submission (Ext.P19) and pass appropriate orders. The court emphasized that since the petitioner no longer held an FL-3 license due to the upgraded status, the petitioner's status quo would be maintained until a decision was made. The 1st respondent was instructed to take action within one month of the judgment, ensuring a fair hearing for the petitioner.

In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, instructing the petitioner to provide a copy of the judgment and the writ petition to the 1st respondent for further necessary steps.

---