IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 5486 of 2007(C) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. ALL KERALA RETAIL RATION DEALERS ASSOCIATION, REG. NO.540/89, REPRESENTED BY THE VICE - PRESIDENT, P.S.RAJAN. 2. K.M.MEERAN, AUTHORISED RETAIL RATION DEALER NO.42, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV.MR.N.P.SAMUEL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES & CONSUMER AFFAIRS (D) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.SANIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.5486/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. 11538/99 DTD. 23.12.05 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P2:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES. P3:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.1576/D3/02/FCS&CAD DT. 18.7.06 ISSUED BY R1. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.5486 OF 2007 (C) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3. Petitioner also seeks a declaration that the authorised retail distributors of ration articles are not liable to pay licence fee for distributing the ration articles. 2. The main challenge against the rate of fee fixed in Ext.P3 is on the basis that there is no quid pro quo and therefore it is bad. In the judgment of this court in Sidhardhan V. Paravur Municipality (2009(3) KLT 920) it has been held that the principle of quid pro quo is inapplicable in the case of regulatory fees. In my view the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgment is a complete answer to the contentions raised by the petitioner. Writ petition therefore fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC /09 :2 :