IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34760 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAGHAVAN PILLAI, AGED 80 YEARS S/O.KUNJU PILLAI,KUZHIKKATTU HOUSE IRINGOLE KARA, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY (TAXES GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE KUNNATHUNADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD ERNAKULAM. 6. GEORGEKUTTY VARGHESE,UPPAZHAKATTU HOUSE KOOTHATTUKULAM PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT NOW RESIDING AT UPPAZHAKKATTU HOUSE SOCIETY PADI, MANNOOR PO, THRIKKALATHOOR M.C.ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA. 7. VILALSINI, W/O.VELAYUDHAN VADAYATTU HOUSE, VADAVUKODU KARA KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GP SMT.SUDHA DEVI SC SRI.KOSHY GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).34760/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, along with four others, bid for the right to conduct toddy shops in Perumbavoor Excise Range for the abkari year 1999-2000. It seems that subsequently, by an order dated 6.8.1999 passed by the Assistant Excise Commissioner, certain among the toddy shops in Group Nos.VII, XVII and XXVII were transferred to the name of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he can therefore, be treated as employer only in respect of those shops which are mentioned in Ext.P1 certificate. 2. Petitioner, along with ten others, was also a licensee for toddy shops in Perumbavoor Excise Range for the year 2000-01 and for the year 1999-00. Petitioner is not a defaulter because the liability, in respect of the shops allotted in the name of the petitioner as per Ext.P1, has been discharged in its entirety, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner. He therefore, submitted Ext.P2 application W.P.(C).34760/2008 2 for release of the documents, which were deposited with the Department as a security at the time of grant of licence. Those documents have not been released so far and hence the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as evidenced by Exts.P4 and P5, certain among the toddy shops, were exclusively allotted to the name of respondents 6 and 7 and it seems that these two persons have not discharged their liability in its entirety. This is treated as a reason for not releasing the documents deposited by the petitioner with the Department by way of security. 4. Ext.P6 is a comprehensive representation filed by the petitioner before the fifth respondent, pointing out these facts and seeking revocation of Ext.P3 by which there has been a refusal on the part of the fifth respondent in releasing the documents deposited by the petitioner for non-discharge of the entire liability payable as contribution by respondents 6 and 7. W.P.(C).34760/2008 3 5. Learned counsel for the fifth respondent submits that Ext.P6 shall be looked into by the fifth respondent and a decision taken thereon, if necessary after hearing respondents 6 and 7 as well. 6. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the fifth respondent to consider Ext.P6 as a plea for revocation of Ext.P3 and take a decision thereon with specific reference to the question as to whether there was a separate allotment of shops in favour of the petitioner and respondents 6 and 7 separately, and whether the petitioner has discharged the liability relatable to the shops allotted in his favour. If it is found that it has been so discharged, then positive decision may be taken on Ext.P6 within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs