IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2009 / 4TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24484 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RETNA KUMARI, W/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNAN, PULIMPANKADU, ERIMAYOOR, ALATHOOR, KUNISERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. DEEPA, D/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNAN, PULIMPANKADU, ERIMAYOOR, ALATHOOR, KUNISERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. LINCY, D/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNAN, PULIMPANKADU, ERIMAYOOR, ALATHOOR, KUNISERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. FRANCY, D/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNAN, PULIMPANKADU, ERIMAYOOR, ALATHOOR, KUNISERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KOTTAYAM. 3. WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, LOGOS CENTRE, KOTTAYAM-686 001. R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KTWWFB (TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.24484 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT The predecessor in interest of the petitioners, late Ramakrishnan was one of the licensees of toddy shop Nos.190, 191, 192, 193, 221 and 223 of Erattupetta Excise Range. It was alleged by Ramakrishnan that his name was fraudulently used by the actual licensees. Ramakrishnan had, therefore, filed Ext.P1 representation before the 2nd respondent. Nevertheless Ext.P3 order of assessment was passed by the 2nd respondent against Ramakrishnan. This was challenged by Ramakrishnan in W.P.C.No.32365/01. The same was considered along with another W.P.C.No.26233/05 filed by him challenging recovery. By a detailed judgment Ext.P4, this court observed, on a perusal of the files, that there is an enormous doubt as to who was the real licensee and a detailed enquiry was essential. The Commissioner of Excise was directed to call for the entire files regarding issuance of licence, W.P.(C).No.24484 of 2009 :: 2 :: remittance of kist and other abkari dues. The matter was directed to be considered by the Commissioner, who was asked to take a final decision in the matter after hearing the parties. According to the petitioner, nothing happened after Ext.P4 judgment dated 2.11.2001. Ramakrishnan died on 30.9.2006. The petitioners, as legal heirs of Ramakrishnan have now been served with Ext.P5 notice demanding an amount of Rs.1,21,837/-. This has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. I heard learned counsel for the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board also. 3. Ext.P4 judgment has become final. This court has practically directed the Commissioner of Excise to pass a fresh order in the matter of determining who is the licensee of the toddy shops in question. Earlier orders of assessment as regards Ramakrishnan, now deceased, could be enforced only subject to verification and enquiry, that might have been done by the Commissioner of Excise, pursuant to Ext.P4 W.P.(C).No.24484 of 2009 :: 3 :: judgment. If such verification and an order pursuant to Ext.P4 has not been passed by the Commissioner during the lifetime of Ramakrishnan, his legal heirs cannot be mulcted with the liability, on his death. 4. The petitioners may file a detailed representation pointing out these aspects, as objections to Ext.P5 and after hearing them, the Welfare Fund Inspector shall pass orders referring to such objections, specifically finding whether the Commissioner of Excise had passed an order in terms of Ext.P4 judgment. If no such order has been passed, then Ext.P5 shall not be enforced against the petitioners. If any order has been passed, then it shall be enforced only, subject to such orders. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge