IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 25TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3317 of 2011(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SADATH, S/O.ALI, KALATHIL VEEDU, JEWS STREET, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: -------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EXCISE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. DY.COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, ERNAKULAM-682 011. 4. ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM-682 011. 5. PARAVUR MUNICIPALITY, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, PARAVUR-683 513. RI TO R4 BY SMT.K.R.DEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R5 BY ADV. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jkk C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 3317 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is residing in Jew Street in Paravoor. This writ petition has been filed mainly with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 2, 4 and 5 to consider and pass orders on Exts.P3 to P5 representations submitted by the petitioner. The further prayer is for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 2 to 4 not to issue licence for transfer of FL 1 shop situated in Paravur to building No.3/261 owned by Biju Thattarapparambil in violation of the relevant provisions under the Abkari Act. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel for the 3rd respondent as also the learned Government Pleader. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instruction, submitted that no such application for transfer of FL 1 shop was submitted by the concerned licencee. It is thus evident that this writ petition is filed solely based on an apprehension. In other words this writ petition is premature. Therefore, with liberty to WPC No.3317/2011 2 the petitioner to resort to appropriate proceedings at the appropriate time to challenge any proposal to shift the concerned FL I shop in case of any such proposal, this writ petition is closed. Sd/- C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE jma //true copy// P.A to Judge