IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26445 of 2011(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BIK-MAARK INTERNATIONAL MARKETING(P)LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.ALI A.M., DOOR NO.10/SF2, 2ND FLOOR, TEEPPEYEM SQUARE, OPP:INDIAN OIL OUTLET NEAR NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT, COCHIN-683111. 2. MR.ALI A.M., MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIK-MAARK INTERNATIONAL MARKETING(P)LTD. DOOR NO.10/SF2, 2ND FLOOR, TEEPPEYEM SQUARE, OPP:INDIAN OIL OUTLET NEAR NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT, COCHIN-683111. 3. MR.JALIL K.A., DIRECTOR, BIK-MAARK INTERNATIONAL MARKETING(P)LTD. DOOR NO.10/SF2, 2ND FLOOR, TEEPPEYEM SQUARE, OPP:INDIAN OIL OUTLET NEAR NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT, COCHIN-683111. 4. MR.BIJU KARNAN, KURUVAMPADATH HOUSE, OKKAL KARA, CHELAMATTOM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM-683550. 5. MR.ROBIN G.PANICKER, 978A(8/967A) KAYAMKULATHUSSERY, 11, ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688561. 6. MR.SHEREEF K., KUNNATH HOUSE, KAVUKODE POST, THANNEERCODE, PALGHAT DISTRICT-679536. BY ADV.SMT.V.P.SEEMANTHINI ADV. SRI.M.R.ANISON SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SMT.P.A.RINUSA SMT.ANNIE JACOB WPC.26445/2011 RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (CRIMES), CBCID, HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, WAYANAD-673122. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.26445/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THAT CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF IST PETITION COMPANY DATED 12/5/2008. EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CHART SHOWING THE ADVERTISEMENT/SALE PROMOTIONS EXPENSES OF THE 6 BUSINESS CONCERNS. EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF THOSE 207 NIRAPARA FOOD PRODUCTS SOLD OUT IN COMPANY. EXT.P4 A COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED 3/8/2011. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/9/2011. EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLYT GIVEN BY THE SECRETARIAT ON 20/12/2002. EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31/3/2003. EXT.P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 1/8/2011. EXT.P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE FEDERAL BANK DATED 1/8/2011. EXT.P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE SALES EFFECTED BY ONE SUCH DISTRIBUTOR TAKEN FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE COMPANY. EXT.P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE GOVT. ALONG WITH THE NOTIFICATION DATEDD 12/9/2011. // True Copy // P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 26445 of 2011 E ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ The first petitioner is a company and the others are its Managing Director, Director and the former Managing Directors. The company is engaged in the sale of products manufactured under the trade name, 'Nirapara'. It is stated that, though the said activity of the company is outside the purview of Price Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978(Act 43 of 1978), on that basis, crime has been registered and the bank account of the petitioner has been frozen with effect from 01.08.2011, which has been informed the petitioner by Ext.P9 letter. 2. Apart from contending that the activities of the petitioner are not covered by the provisions of Act 43 of 1978, petitioner also relies on Ext.P11 Government Order dated 12.09.2011 and contends that its activities are fully W.P.(C) No.26445/2011 : 2 : covered by the said guidelines. Therefore, the writ petition has been filed, seeking to quash Ext.P9 and for permitting the petitioner to resume its activities. 3. I heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents. 4. Now that the contention of the petitioner is that its activities are covered by Ext.P11, necessarily, this is a matter for the petitioner to take up before the first respondent and in which event, it is for the first respondent to consider the said contention, issue appropriate clarification, if the petitioner deserves such an order. 5. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition, directing that it will be open to the petitioner to move an appropriate application claiming the benefit of Ext.P11 before the first respondent. If such a representation is filed within ten days from today, orders thereon will be passed, with notice to the first petitioner, at any rate, within four weeks thereafter. W.P.(C) No.26445/2011 : 3 : Needless to say that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the contentions and these are left open to be decided by the first respondent. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/17/10 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge