IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 WA.No. 545 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.8772/2010 Dated 17/03/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, VAIKOM,KOTTAYAM. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. BENNY GERVACIS RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------------ 1. P.R.PAVITHRAN, AGED 75 YEARS, S/O.LATE RAMANKUTTY, PAKKUVALIL HOUSE, AMBIKA MARKET P.O., VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. P.N.SASI, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, PAZHANILATHURA HOUSE, THALAYZHAM, ULLALA P.O., VAIKOM,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY MR. C.C. THOMAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE, BY ADV.MR. M.G.KARTHIKEYAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------- W.A. No. 545 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellants. Respondents herein were the writ petitioners. A crime has been registered against them as per Ext.P1 crime and occurrence report that they sold toddy on a dry day. The appellants/respondents submitted that though the offences alleged will only come under Section 56(b) of the Abkari Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), for extraneous reasons the offences under Sections 55(a) and 55(i) of the Act were also included in Ext.P1. They challenged Ext.P1 before this Court. This Court, by Ext.P7 judgment, quashed their prosecution for the offences under Sections 55 (a) and 55(i) of the Act but permitted to proceed with the prosecution under Section 56(b) of the Act. The appellants/respondents moved the Apex Court and obtained Ext.P19 interim order of stay against Ext.P7 judgment. On the strength of that interim order, further proceedings against the respondents/petitioners were taken on the strength of Ext.P1 by issuing Ext.P13. Challenging Ext.P13, the writ petition was filed. On the motion of the respondents/petitioners, leaned Single Judge granted interim order enabling the respondents/petitioners to get preference for allotment of the toddy shops in Group No.II of Vaikom excise range for W.A..No.545/2010 2 the year 2010-2011 in the light of Rule 5(1)(a) of the Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002. Challenging that interim order, this writ appeal is preferred. 2. We heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the respondents. 3. . We were taken through the materials on record including Ext.P1 as also Ext.P7 judgment of this Court. Leaned Government Pleader appearing for the appellants/respondents also referred to the interim order of the Apex Court Having regard to the facts of the case and the nature of the allegations in Ext.P1, we think the interim order granted by the learned single Judge advances justice and prevents its miscarriage. Therefore, we are inclined to uphold the order of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, (JUDGE ) P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps