IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 22581 of 2004(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ E.F.JOHNSON, AUTHORISED WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTOR (A.W.D. NO.3CKD) CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.S.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI SRI.T.R.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, THRISSUR. 4. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD. 5. C.S.SARASWATHI, AUTHORISED RETAIL DEALER, A.R.D NO.8, POOKKODE PANCHAYATH, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD FOR R1 & 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.22581/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR ISSUED BYB OARDOF REVENUE, CIVIL SUPPLIES DT 10.10.69. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF WEEK ENDING AUTHORITY LIST 6.8.04 ISSUED ON 28.7.04 BY THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22581 OF 2004 (L) ===================== Dated this the 9th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the licencee of AWD No.3 of Chavakkad Taluk. According to the petitioner, 39 ARDs were attached to his shop. It is stated that the 5th respondent, one of the ARDs who was linked to the petitioner's AWD was ordered to be relinked to another AWD at Palayoor. According to the petitioner, there was absolutely no justification for such relinking of the 5th respondent, which is stated to have been ordered without even putting the petitioner on notice. 2. A reading of the counter affidavit filed in this writ petition show that the respondents admit that the 5th respondent was attached to the petitioner's shop. It is stated that in terms of Clause 56 of the Kerala Rationing Order, the District Collector and any officer above the Taluk Supply Officer is entitled to link and relink the ARDs to AWDs. According to the respondents, the 5th respondent filed a request to the District Supply Officer stating that the distance from her ARD to the AWD of the petitioner is more as compared to the distance from her ARD to the AWD to WPC 22581/04 :2 : which she is now relinked. On that basis, pointing out her convenience, she sought relinking of her ARD to AWD of one Sri.C.P.Augusthy. On receipt of the complaint, an enquiry was conducted, when the official respondents found substance in the complaint, the relinking in question was ordered. 3. The competence of the respondents to order relinking of the ARD cannot be doubted. The question will be whether there was any circumstances warranting such an order. A reading of the counter affidavit show that the 5th respondent herself sought for relinking, primarily on account of the inconvenience that she had to suffer on account of her linking to the petitioner's shop. On enquiry, this factual complaint was found to be correct and the respondents have ordered relinking. I do not think that in such a situation, any illegality can be found to justify interference with the order that has been passed. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp