IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2010 / 15TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30812 of 2010(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- N.RAGHAVAN NAMBIAR, AUTHORISED RETAIL DEALER (A.R.D) NO.216, MOOLAKANDOM, P.O.ANANDASRAM, HOSDURG, KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.T.S.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, SRI.O.K.MURALEEDHARAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES & CONSUMERS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARGOD. 4. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, KASARGOD. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, HOSDURG. 6. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, HOSDURG. R1 TO R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.30812 OF 2010(B) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the Authorized Retail Dealer No.216 in Hosdurg Taluk of Kasaragod District. By Ext.P3 order, the dealership was terminated finding irregularities committed by the petitioner. It was also ordered that the security is forfeited and an amount of Rs.2,48,554/- will be realized from the petitioner. 2. The appeal filed was rejected by the District Collector by Ext.P4 and the Commissioner also upheld the order by Ext.P5. Petitioner filed a revision before the Government and the Government finally by Ext.P9 order after finding the petitioner guilty of misconducts, restored the dealership on sympathetic considerations. But however, it was ordered that the amount of Rs.2,48,454/- will be realized from the petitioner as ordered in Ext.P3. 3. The amount is not deposited. According to the petitioner he filed Ext.P10, seeking review of Ext.P9 and orders on Ext.P10 have not been passed. It is stated that in the meanwhile recovery proceedings are initiated and therefore the writ petition is field. WPC.No. 30812/2010 :2 : 4. I do not find any merit in the writ petition. By Ext.P3 order petitioner's dealership was terminated on finding out the irregularities committed by the petitioner. This order was upheld by both the District Collector and the Commissioner for Civil Supplies. Although, the Government agreed with the findings in Exts.P4 and P5, on sympathetic consideration the dealership was restored to the petitioned on condition that the amount will be realized. The authorities having concurrently found the guilt of the petitioner and since the Government order also directed realization of the amount ordered in Ext.P3, the impugned orders are liable to be upheld and I do so. 5. In so far as Ext.P10 filed by the petitioner seeking review of Ext.P9 is concerned, in the absence of any provision for review in the Rationing Order, such a review petition is not maintainable and therefore Ext.P10 is unsustainable and this court cannot require the first respondent to consider the same. In that view of the matter the petitioner is liable to make payment of the amount mentioned in Ext.P3 order. 6. However, having regard to the financial constraints pointed out by the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner will WPC.No. 30812/2010 :3 : be permitted to pay the amount ordered to be realized, in two equal monthly instalments, first of which shall be paid on or before 30.10.2010 and the 2nd instalment shall be paid on or before 30.11.2010. On such payment recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance and in case payment is not made, it will be open to the respondents to take further action. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 5th respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/