IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2009 / 5TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1342 of 2009 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.15867/2009 Dated 17/06/2009 .................... APPELLANT//PETITIONER: -------------------- RATHINAM S/O.PADMANABHAN CHETTIYAR PRAMOD BHAVAN, MALAYINKEEZHU DESOM NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT , TAXES (G) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O. SREEDHARAN THUMPUMKARA VEEDU, PACHALLOOR, THIRUVALLOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.A. No.1342 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 26th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant is the writ petitioner. The petitioner was the licensee of T.S.No.1 of Vamanapuram Range from 2002-03 continuously up to 2007-08. In the meantime, the shop has been shifted to Nedumangad Range as Shop No.10. During the year 2008-09 petitioner could not get licence as at the time of auction he was absent. The petitioner has his own explanation for that. According to him, he was cheated by his joint licensee in collusion with the officials. Whatever that be, the fact that he was not a licensee for the year 2008-09 stared in his face and when auction was conducted this year as per the present Abkari Policy issued on 29.2.2009, another person was preferred. Obviously, petitioner lost his preference for the reason he was not a licensee for the previous year. This writ petition was filed when auction was going to take place. But the learned Single Judge did not grant WA.No.1342/09 - 2 - any relief and dismissed the writ petition. The auction for the said shop took place on 23.6.2009 and one Mr.Ganesh has been granted licence. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge. 2. We heard learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3. Going by the pleadings and submissions, it would appear that the claim of the appellant is that non-conducting of the shop by him during the year 2008-09 may not act as a disqualification against him. Such a relief could not be granted by this Court. Rightly or wrongly, he was denied licence during the last year and the said proceedings has become final. No court or authority can ignore that. The Writ Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. If the appellant has got a case that he has better claim than the person selected this year, he will be free to work out his remedies. The judgment in this appeal or the judgment of the WA.No.1342/09 - 3 - learned Single Judge will not stand in the way of the petitioner in pursuing that claim. Sd/- K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. Sd/- C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. DK. (True copy)