Kerala High Court
Joseph Joseph vs The Excise Commissioner on 23 November, 2010
Author: C.K.Abdul Rehim
Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/30TH PHALGUNA 1933
WP(C).No. 24862 of 2011 (G)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
1. JOSEPH JOSEPH, PERUMANATHADATHIL HOUSE,
KULACHIRA P.O., ETTUMANOOR VILLAGE
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
2. P.K.BHASKARAN, PARIYARATH HOUSE,
CHIRAKKADAVU P.O., PADINJATTINKARA
CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
3. CYRIAC JOSEPH, THEKKUMPERIMALIL HOUSE,
AMANAKARA P.O., RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN
SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER
COMMISSINERATE OF EXCISE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 601.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
KOTTAYAM-686 001.
4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE,
CHANGANACHERRY-686 024.
5. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR,
EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, CHANGANACHERRY-686024.
6. SHYBO, S/O.CHELLAPPAN,
MANGALATHEL HOUSE, THIDANADU P.O., PALA
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 681.
R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.T. SHEEBA
R6 BY ADVS. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ
SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-03-2012,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 24862 of 2011 (G)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 23/11/2010
ISSUED BY THE ASST.CHEMICAL EXAMINER TO GOVT.OF KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/1/2011 SENT TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3: PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 18.3.2011
ISSUED BY THE ASST.CHEMICAL EXAMINER TO GOVT.OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P4: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.XA7-32658/2010 DATED 24/3/2011
PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5: PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8/4/2011 IN WPC.10741/2011
PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P6: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.XA7-32658/10 DATED 20/5/2011 PASSED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7: PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 16/9/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8: PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 17/9/2011 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9: PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.3.2010 IN WA NO. 530/2010
PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P10: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.5.2011 IN SLP (CRL) NO.
3263-3266/2011 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT.
EXHIBIT P11: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.11.2011 IN CRL.M.C. 3502/2011
PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P12: PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.12.2011 IN WP(C) NO.
24808/2011 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
Mn
C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J.
-------------------------------
WP(C).NO. 24862 of 2011
---------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of March, 2012
JUDGMENT
Petitioners herein were licencees with respect to toddy shops in Group No.VIII of Changanacherry Excise Range for the year 2010-2011. Since the licence was cancelled on the basis of registration of a criminal case, as per CR.No.78/10, they were not allowed any preferential right for allotment of toddy shops for the succeeding year of 2011-12. Petitioners in this writ petition is challenging denial of the preferential right and is seeking directions for permitting to conduct shops for the remaining period in the year 2011-12.
2. Petitioners have produced Ext.P11 judgment passed by this court in Crl.M.C.No.3502/11. It is evident that, the criminal case registered against the petitioners was quashed by this court. In view of Ext.P11 judgment the petitioners contended that the cancellation was illegal and the denial of preferential right was not justified. However, the current Abkari year will expire on 31.3.2012. I am of the view that, in view of quashing of the WP(C). 24862 /2011 2 criminal case the question regarding preferential right of the petitioners need only be considered while deciding the sale of licence for conducting of the toddy shops for the coming year, 2012-13. Since Rule 5(1)(a) is attracted in the matter of granting preference, I am of the view that the petitioners are entitled to be considered for grant of licence for the coming year 2012-13, subject to the Abkari policy which will be formulated by the Government. However, since it is evident that the 6th respondent was conducting the toddy shops in question for the current year, he is also entitled to have preferential right under Rule 5(1)(a).
3. Under the above mentioned circumstances the writ petition is disposed of declaring that the petitioners will be entitled to have preferential claim under Rule 5(1)(a) along with the 6th respondent for getting licence for the toddy shops in group No.8 of Chenganassery Range, subject to the policy which will be formulated by the Government with respect to the year 2012-13.
pmn/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE WP(C). 24862 /2011 3 pmn/ WP(C). 24862 /2011 4