IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 20417 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CHELLAMMA NARAYANAN, 65 YEARS W/O.LATE KUMARI NARAYANAN PORIYUAMKUNNEL HOUSE MUTHOLAPURAM PO., ELANJI, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, PALAKKAD 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD 4. THE C.I. OF EXCISE, PALAKKAD 5. SILOMANY, W/O.P.K.VASU, PATHAMPADAM HOUSE, EDATHARA DESOM PARALI VILLAGE, PALAKKAD 6. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TAXES(A) DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA FOR R1-4 & 6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.20417 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 5th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Exts.P11 and P12 orders, whereby the petitioner's application for endorsement of her name in the toddy shop licence in the place of deceased licensee, as the legal heir of the licensee has been rejected. According to the petitioner, in so far as there is no dispute regarding the fact that the petitioner is the legal heir entitled to succeed to the licence, the provisions of the Abkari Act and Rules the 1st respondent could not have refused to endorse the petitioner's name in the licence, along with co-licensees in the place of the deceased licensee. 2. A statement is filed by the learned Government Pleader. Their only contention is that the documents required for the purpose were not produced in time. Admittedly the application was filed in time. Only the documents were filed belatedly. I am of opinion that at best, it is only a hypertechnical contention. For that a legal right of the petitioner should not be defeated. In the above circumstances, I quash the impugned orders and direct the 1st respondent to make appropriate endorsement in the licence in question as requested by the petitioner. This shall be done before the next renewal of the licence. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// . P.A. to Judge 2 ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge