IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7043 of 2009(A) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- OUSEPH, S/O.MATHYAS, AGED 47, AZHAMKAL HOUSE, PUTHIYATHURA P.O. BY MR.R.T.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE. MR.V.VIJULAL, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. S. RAJENDRAN, S/O.SAMUEL, SUNNY HOUSE, KOOTTAPPANA, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR, NEYYATTINKARA. 5. SUMESH LAL, S/O.SURENDRAN, THEKKETHIL VEETTIL, ALAPPATTUKARA POTHENCODE, KEEZHUTHONNAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. SUDARSHAN, S/O.KANNAN, PUTHUMANGALATHU VEETTIL, PERUMANKARA, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMAR, KOLLAM. 7. RAMANAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, PALOTTUVILA, MALAYINKEEZH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MS. K.R. DEEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.7043 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner claims to have been a licencee for toddy shop No.1 of Neyyattinkara Excise Range for three years consecutively from 2004 to 2007. When group system was introduced for the year 2007, according to the petitioner, he was prevailed upon by respondents 4 to 6, who bid for the entire group to refrain from making any claim to toddy shop No.1 on the alleged assurance that he would be allowed to run the toddy shop No.1. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner did not seek licence for toddy shop No.1 and respondents 4 to 6 were given the entire group. The petitioner claims to have run the toddy shop under respondents 4 to 6 for the year 2007-2008. For the next year, respondents 4 to 6 are alleged to have broken the promise given to the petitioner and permitted the 7th respondent to run the toddy shop as a benami instead of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, by virtue of his having run the toddy shop prior to 2007-2008 for three years, he is entitled to preference in the matter of W.P.(c)No.7043/09 2 allotment of toddy shop. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following relief: “(i) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction order directing Respondents 1 to 3 to allot toddy shop No.1 of Neyyattinkara Range to the petitoner in exercise of his right of preference in terms of Ext.P-2 for the Abkari Year 2009-10”. 2. I am of opinion that the petitioner should be disqualified on the mere ground that he was a party to a fraud on the State for having conducted the toddy shop as a benami of respondents 4 to 6, which is prohibited by the licence issued to respondents 4 to 6. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, declining to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.7043/09 3