IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2008 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 34427 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.P.KUTTIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, PROPRIETOR, CORAL GAS AGENCIES, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.S.PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.A.INDIRA, RAVINDRA GAS AGENCY, ANAYADI PO., SOORANADU NORTH, KOLLAM. 2. THE MANAGER, SIVASAKTHI GAS AGENCY MAVELIKKARA P.O., MAVELIKKARA. 3. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, MAVELIKKARA. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. 5. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION (SOUTHERN REGION) INDIAN OIL BHAVAN MUMGAMPAKKAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI: 600 034 REPRESENTED BY ITS AREA MANAGER. 6. MR.V.ANUJAN, S/O.VASU PUTHENVEEDU, PEELAPUZHA, HARIPADU P.O., ALLEPPEY DISTRICT THEN TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, MAVELIKKARA. BY SC SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).34427/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the proprietor of a Gas Agency engaged in the supply and distribution of LPG cylinders. First respondent is another Gas Agency engaged in the same business. 114 cylinders were seized from the first respondent on suspicion of malpractice and pursuant to orders passed by the Taluk Supply Officer, it was entrusted to the nearest Gas Agency, the second respondent. Petitioner has a case, which it is difficult to follow, that due to the persuasion of the sixth respondent, the Taluk Supply Officer in person, the District Collector compelled the petitioner to remit an amount of Rs.23,520/- and to take over all the 114 cylinders from the custody of the second respondent. No order passed by the District Collector in this regard is made available. Petitioner submits that it was pursuant to an oral order. It is difficult to countenance the submission. Be that as it may, he did not get the cylinders, but he had remitted W.P.(C).34427/2008 2 the amounts towards the value of the same. In the meanwhile, on a writ petition filed by the first respondent, the Gas Agency , from where the cylinders were taken into custody, this Court, as per Ext.P3 judgment, directed that the cylinders be entrusted back to the petitioner therein namely, the first respondent herein. It is seen that the petitioner herein was the additional third respondent in the said writ petition. This Court was not pleased to reserve any right available to the petitioner, as he now puts forward. 2. In my view, if the petitioner has a claim for re- fund, he may move the District Collector in this regard. Prayers made in the writ petition at this stage, are misconceived. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the District Collector in the first instance, writ petition is closed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs