IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2010 / 12TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16157 of 2010(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.B.GOPAKUMAR, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN, CHATHAMKULATHIL HOUSE, THOZHUPADAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR, SMT.P.A.ANITHA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. RAMDAS, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, THACHOTH HOUSE, NEDUNGOTTOOR P.O., SHORNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, EXCISE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISUR. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16157 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a toddy worker registered under the Toddy Workers Welfare fund Scheme. He has been continuously working in the Thozhupadam toddy shop within the Vadakkancherry Excise Range for the past many years. As per the new Abkari policy of the State Government, the toddy shops are licensed on group basis i.e. by clubbing six toddy shops in an area into a group and each group is licensed to a contractor. The first respondent is the licensee in respect of the group in which the Thozhupadam toddy shop is included. The complaint of the petitioner is that the first respondent did not renew the license in respect of shop No.23, the Thozhupadam toddy shop, though he has renewed the licenses in respect of all the other shops in the said group. He has submitted Ext.P2 representation before the second respondent detailing his grievances. 2. Since Ext.P2 has already been submitted to the second respondent, who is the competent authority to redress the wpc No.16157/2010 2 grievances of the petitioner, I do not propose to consider the contentions of the petitioner on the merits. 3. This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as other interested persons. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge css/