IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 628 of 2011(C) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. D.SATHEESAN, S/O.DHARMARAJAN, KODIYIL VEEDU, NEHRU JUNCTION KAZHAKKUTTOM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. B.KUMARI,W/O.SATHEESAN, KODIYIL VEEDU, NEHRU JUNCTION KAZHAKKUTTOM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 043. 4. TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER TALUK SUPPLY OFFICE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001. 5. CITY RATIONING OFFICER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001. 6. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001 R1 TO R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.628/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/7/01 FILED BY THE SOCIETY BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P2 COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO.38952/01 IN OP NO.23752/01 DATED 10/8/01 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P3 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CSI-2655/2001 DATED 16/8/2001 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CS2-4124/2001 DATED 26/9/2001 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN OP NO.23752/2001 DATED 10/8/04. P6 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.MI-4705/04 DATED 29/5/04. P7 COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT IN WPC . 9132/06 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT. P8 COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC.9132/06 DATED 23/3/09. P9 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.11-8911/02/GD DATED 26/11/2010. P10 COPY OF THE ORDER (NOTICE)NO.A 41801/2000 DATED 5/3/2001. P11(A) COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.1 DATED 23/3/01. P11(B) COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.2 DATED 18/4/01. P11(C) COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.92 DATED 27/4/01. P11(D) COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.6 DATED 12/6/01. P12 COPY OF THE CHALAN NO.625 DATED 11/4/01. P13 COPY OF THE CHALAN NO.1079 DATED 27/4/01. P14 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT IN FAVOUR OF DISTRICT MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA DATED 25/9/01. P15 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT IN FAVOUR OF DISTRICT MANAGER,FOOD CORPORATION ON INDIA DATED 25/9/01. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ sts P.S.TO.JUDGE S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 628 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The 1st petitioner was the secretary of a co-operative society, who was holding a licence to run an Authorised Wholesale Depot for ration articles. The 2nd petitioner is the wife of the 1st petitioner. The 2nd petitioner provided solvency for grant of licence to the society. Thereafter, when the period of the licence expired, ration articles supplied to the society have been taken over from the society, and handed over to another licensee. He reported that the ration articles were damaged. Proceedings were initiated for recovering the price of the damaged ration articles from the petitioners. The petitioners are challenging the same. According to the petitioners, there is no reason to recover any money from the society or the petitioners insofar as the ration articles were taken delivery of from the Food Corporation of India after paying full price of the same and even if it is damaged, since the price has already been paid, no amount can be recovered from the society or the petitioners. I am of of opinion that the question as to whether the ration articles were damaged and as to whether the petitioners are liable to make good the value of the ration articles themselves are questions of fact, which have to be decided after hearing the petitioners as well as the other licensee to whom the w.p.c.628/11 2 ration articles were transferred. The respondents are liable to consider the question as to whether the society had paid the price of the ration articles in full before taking delivery of the same and whether the petitioners are, therefore, liable to make good the loss caused on account of the ration articles being damaged. In the above circumstances, the impugned proceedings are quashed. The 2nd respondent shall consider the matter afresh after hearing the petitioners as well as the licensee to whom the ration articles have been transferred, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge