IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17020 of 2011(B) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.RAVI KUMAR, POLLAYIL HOUSE, CMC 12, CHERTHALA P.O., PIN-688 524. BY ADVS. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. 3. DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 001. 4. SUB TREASRY OFFICER, CHERTHALA, PIN-688 524. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.17020/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.TR 4241/2010 DATED 21/6/2011 OF THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. P2 COPY OF THE MEMO NO.TR 4920/2010 DATED 30/11/2010 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3 COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA DATED 6/12/2010. P4 COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 7/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. P5 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.VIG.1/10862/2010 DATED 24/1/2011 OF THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES ADDRESSED TO THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, CHERTHALA. P6 COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 11/2/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, CHERTHALA. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17020 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is a Stamp Vendor, is stated as aggrieved of Ext.P1 order dated 21-06-2011 passed by the 3rd respondent cancelling the license without issuing any notice of hearing and thus in contravention of the fundamental principles of natural justice. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the action pursued by the 3rd respondent is per-se wrong and illegal and that, the actual facts and figures could not be brought to the notice of the 3rd respondent, since no notice, whatsoever, was issued before cancelling the license. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Going by the materials on record, it is very much obvious that no notice is stated as issued to the petitioner before cancelling the license. What is stated in Ext.P1 is that, on receipt of certain complaints, the 2nd respondent had instructed the 3rd respondent to conduct an inquiry and to submit a report. Accordingly, an inquiry is stated as completed and a report was W.P.(C) No. 17020/2011 - 2 - submitted before the 2nd respondent on 31-12-2010. It is pursuant to the same that, the 2nd respondent, as per the instructions dated 04-04-2011, directed the 3rd respondent to cancel the license of the petitioner and to report, which in turn has been implemented by the 3rd respondent by passing Ext.P1 order dated 21-06-2011. The sequence of events as narrated in Ext.P1 clearly reveals that, no notice, whatsoever, was issued by the 2nd respondent or the 3rd respondent before the decision to cancel the license of the petitioner was taken, and as such, the impugned proceedings are no more liable to be sustained for infringement of the fundamental principles of natural justice. 5. In the above circumstances, Ext.P1 is set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed, however, making it clear that this will not bar the way of the concerned respondent in proceeding with further steps by issuing a notice of hearing to the petitioner and in finalising the proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. The Writ Petition is disposed of. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE