IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 25065 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- K.T. KURUVILA,AGED 63 YEARS, S/O K.K.THOMAS, KADICHEENI HOUSE, KAVANAD ROAD, VADAMA VILLAGE,MALA P.O.,GTHRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SRI.MANU TOM RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 25065 OF 2008 H ==================== Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was one of the Abkari contractors during the year 1980-81. In this writ petition, what is claimed by the petitioner is the benefit of Ext.P5, Amnesty scheme announced by the Government of Kerala. Exts.P6 and P7 are the two representations made by the petitioner for the aforesaid benefit. However, it is seen that in these representations, petitioner is also claiming that liability is to be apportioned among the other co licencees as well. This is not a benefit which the petitioner can claim while claiming the benefit of Amnesty scheme, which only provides for settlement of liability in the manner provided therein. 2. It is pointed out by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is reserving his liberty for claiming apportionment of liability and recovery of individual contribution from the other licencees and that the same will be pursued independently. All that he now wants is that the claim made by WPC 25065/08 :2 : him in Exts. P6 and P7 for the benefit of Ext.P5 Amnesty Scheme should be directed to be considered. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 2nd respondent shall consider the eligibility of the petitioner for the benefit of Amnesty scheme as announced by the Government of Kerala in Ext.P5 ignoring the claim for apportionment of the liability. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp