IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 35813 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. M/S.VICTORY MARITIME AGENCIES, (SHIPPING AND C&F AGENTS), NEAR CITY POST OFFICE, KANNUR 670003 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P.P.FAROOQ, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT "HIRA", NEAR MANIKKAKAVU, P.O.THANA, KANNUR 670012. 2. P.P.FAROOQ, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 50 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, MANAGING PARTNER OF M/S.VICTORY MARITIME AGENCIES, RESIDING AT "HIRA", NEAR MANIKKAKAVU, P.O.THANA, KANNUR 670012 3. P.P.MOHAMMED ASHRAF, S/O.HAMEED, AGED 51 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, PARTNER OF M/S.VICTORY MARITIME AGENCIES, RESIDING AT "SAFOORAS", POOTHAPARA, AZHIKODE, KANNUR 670009. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SENIOR PORT CONSERVATOR, AZHEEKKAL PORT, KANNUR. 2. THE PORT OFFICER OF KOZHIKODE, P.O.BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PORTS, KERALA, 5TH FLOOR, NEW CORPORATION BUILDING, LMS JUNCTION, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, PORTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SHRI.P.N.SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.35813 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners seek a declaration that Ext.P6 order of termination dated 25/11/2008 is illegal. There is also a prayer to quash Ext.P8 and to direct the 1st respondent to issue dredging licence to the 1st petitioner. 2. Admittedly, the petitioners were granted manual dredging licence on a monthly basis, the period of which expired on 30/11/2008. All such licences have been cancelled, and there is no dispute on that factual position. If that be so, their grievance at best can be that the licence has been prematurely terminated from 25/11/2008. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied on Ext.P4 judgment and contended that the respondents could not pick and choose licencees. It is stated that having chosen to issue licence, the respondents could not have chosen only the Co-operative Society. I am unable to accept this contention, for the reason that from the additional documents produced by the petitioners, it would appear WP(C) No.35813/2008 -2- that as against the individual licences that were granted till 30/11/2008, the respondents have now chosen to grant exclusive licence to a Co-operative Society. Only in the event individuals are arbitrarily chosen, can the petitioners complain that they have been discriminated. Since the system of granting individual licence is dispensed with and exclusive licence is granted to a Co-operative Society, the petitioners also cannot plead discrimination. 4. In any event, since the petitioners' licence expired on 30/11/2008, they cannot seek any direction from this Court requiring the respondents to continue the licence any further. For these reasons, I am not inclined to grant the relief sought for in this writ petition. The writ petition fails, and is, accordingly, dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg