IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 7TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29061 of 2010(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.R.SYLESKUMAR,AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.LATE K.V.RAMAKRISHNAN,KALLADA HOUSE, THANISSERY P.O.,MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. K.R.SUNILKUMAR,AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.LATE K.V.RAMAKRISHNAN,KALLADA HOUSE, THANISSERY P.O.,MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN, SRI.NIREESH MATHEW. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, THRISSUR. 2. THE CHIEF WELFARE INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. RENIL ANTO, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.29061 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 29th September, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners who are siblings applied for abkari clearance certificate in respect of Toddy Workers Welfare Fund before the first respondent. However, the same was rejected as per Ext.P1 order on the ground that their late father, a joint licensee of toddy shop Nos.1 to 54 of Cherpu Excise Range, was a defaulter and even now the dues subsist. It is challenging the said order that this writ petition has been filed. 2. The contention of the petitioners is that Ext.P1 is absolutely unsustainable in the light of the decision of this Court in State of Kerala and others v. P.A.Radhakrishnan and others (2010 (2) KHC 231 (DB)). The Division Bench held therein: “the shadow of father's default cannot eclipse legitimate claims of sons.” Relying on the said decision it is contended by the petitioners that the default committed by their father could not be a reason to reject the application made by them for issuance of abkari clearance certificate. In other words, going by the dictum laid down by this Court in the decision in State of Kerala and others v. P.A.Radhakrishnan and others (supra), the authorities should have considered the question whether the applicants/petitioners are defaulters. The respondents did not have a case that the applicants WP(C).No.29061/2010 2 are defaulters. Their case is that the petitioners' late father was a defaulter. 3. In view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in State of Kerala and others v. P.A.Radhakrishnan and others (supra), Ext.P1 is set aside. Consequently, there will be a direction to the first respondent to issue clearance certificate to the petitioners in terms of their request dated 17.8.2010 expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The learned standing counsel for the respondents sought for clarification as to whether this judgment would stand in the way of the respondents in initiating action in accordance with law to realise the arrears. The legal position with respect to the said aspect is well settled and it, in fact, gives no room for any doubt. However, it is made clear that this decision will not stand in the way of the respondents in taking any such action in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS