IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 7TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 25885 of 2009(S) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- SMT.K.V.RATNAVALLI, W/O.(LATE)VIJAYAN, VAZHAPPILLY HOUSE, NATTIKA BEACH, NATTIKA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 566. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED SRI.M.ABDUL RASHEED RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 6. SMT.USHA SUBRAHMANYAM, TEMPORARY LICENSEE, WHOLESALE DEPOT NO.2, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 7. SRI.V.KUNHIKOYA THANGAL, MANAGING DIRECTOR ZAM ZAM TRADING CORPORATION, KOLAZHI, THRISSUR. 8. CIZHO CHANDRAN, REGD. OWNER (KL8-H-7711 LORRY), THAIKOOT HOUSE, KIZHAKUMPATTU KARA, EAST FORT, THRISSUR-5. R1 TO R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.R.SABU ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN FOR R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.25885 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT A.K.Basheer, J. Petitioner who is stated to be an elected member of the Nattika Grama Panchayat claims that she is interested in the welfare and well being of the people of her Panchayat. 2. Petitioner impugns Ext.P3 order passed by the Commissioner of Civil Supplies under which respondent No.6, the licensee of a ration shop, has been imposed with certain penalties for violation of the regulations contained in the Kerala Rationing Order. According to the petitioner, respondent No.6 has got away with a flea- bite sentence at the hands of the Commissioner, even though the irregularities detected and the offence committed by the licensee are, by any standards, quite grave and undoubtedly against the interest of the public at large. 3. It appears that on November 29, 2008 a lorry bearing Registration No.KL8-H- 7711 proceeding towards Palghat, was W.P.(C) No.25885 of 2009. - 2 - intercepted while it was carrying about 200 bags of wheat which bore Food Corporation of India seal. According to the Civil Supplies Department, the clandestine attempt was to divert the rationed article to open market for sale at huge profit. Anyhow, we do not propose to deal with the various allegations and counter allegations as revealed from Ext.P3 order and other materials produced by the petitioner. 4. Ultimately, the Commissioner of Civil Supplies after considering the order passed by the District Collector disposed of the appeal preferred by the licensee/respondent No.6 directing recovery of the 'economic cost' of the excess stock of 161 Quintal Matta rice, 4.913 Quintal Boiled Rice and 2.45 Quintal APL wheat from her, in addition to a sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty thousand) towards fine. The security deposit of the licensee was also ordered to be forfeited. 5. According to the petitioner, the licensee should have been imposed with more stringent and exemplary punishment apart from initiating penal action under the Indian Penal Code, keeping in W.P.(C) No.25885 of 2009. - 3 - view the gravity of the offence. It is true that the Commissioner has take a lenient view and ordered restoration of licence to respondent No.6 because she happens to be the widow of the former licensee of the same ration shop. The contention of the petitioner is that the licensee does not deserve any sympathy. Moreover, she deserves more stringent punishment, contends the petitioner. 6. However, it is submitted on behalf of respondent No.6 that she has preferred a revision petition against the order passed by the Commissioner, as provided under clause 71 of the Kerala Rationing Order in Revision Petition No.12197/B1/2009/Food and the matter is now pending consideration before the Government. He further points out that respondents 7 and 8 have also challenged the above order before the competent authority. 7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we do not propose to express any view on the issue at this stage since admittedly the revision petition filed by the licensee is pending before the Government. Similarly, respondents 7 and 8 have also challenged the order before the competent authority. In other W.P.(C) No.25885 of 2009. - 4 - words, the issue has not attained finality. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is closed without expressing any opinion on its merits. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns