IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 22739 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.MOHANAN, STAMP VENDOR, (UNDER ORDERS OF CANCELLATION) PAYYAKKAL HOUSE, POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELADEVI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 3. SUB TREASURY OFFICER, THRISSUR. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VPV WPCNO.22739/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.A1/2299/03-04 DATED 5.6.2003 ISSUED BY THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 7.6.2003 TO COMMUNICATION DATED 5.6.2003. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.A1 3/2004 DATED 27.2.2004 ISSUED BY THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 3..3.2004 TO COMMUNICATION DATED 27.2.2004. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B6-8637/04.2 DATED 7.2.2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A2-718/2004/L.DIS. DATED 9.2.2005 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, THRISSUR TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6(A): COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1/844/05 DATED 11.2.2005 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 21.2.2005. EXT.P8 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.5028 OF 2005 DATED 13.9.2007 BY THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. EXT.P9 : COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.6151/E3/06/TD DATED 24.11.2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P10 : COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.2007. EXT.P11 : COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(RT)NO.647/08/TD DATED 11.7.2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE VPV ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22739 OF 2008 ===================== Dated this the 24th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T In 1996, the petitioner was appointed as a licenced stamp vendor in Trichur. Proceedings were initiated against him by the 1st respondent for cancellation of his licence. It appears that a complaint was filed by Smt.Sheeja Devi alleging that on 30/12/2002 and 5/2/2003, petitioner sold stamp papers to a person called Sri.Sulfikker and that on the basis of such stamp papers, Sri.Sulfikker had created certain documents concerning the properties of Smt.Sheeja Devi. It was also alleged that in the nalvazhi, Sri.Sulfikker had signed as Smt.Sheeja Devi. It is stated that in such proceedings, 1st respondent asked the petitioner to produce the nalvazhi and other documents. However, petitioner took the position that the nalvazhi was lost. Accordingly, Government issued order dated 4/2/2005 cancelling the licence of the petitioner. This was conveyed to the petitioner by Ext.P5 communication of the District Collector. The termination order was challenged before this Court in WP(C) No.5028/2005. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P8 judgment setting aside the WPC No. 22739/08 :2 : orders, for the reason that the order was passed relying on certain materials which were not disclosed to the petitioner. Therefore, it was ordered that, it will be open to the respondents to issue show cause notice to the petitioner, hear him and pass fresh orders. Accordingly, Ext.P9 show cause was issued and Ext.P10 reply was filed by the petitioner. He was heard and thereafter Ext.P11 order was issued upholding the termination of his licence. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 2. Devoid of all details, it is the admitted factual position that petitioner had sold stamp papers to a person called Sri.Sulfikker, and that, in the registers, the buyer's name was shown as Smt.Sheeja Devi. It was on the strength of such stamp papers that documents concerning the property of Smt.Sheeja Devi were created. Further, the register (Nalvazhi) is a statutory register which is bound to be maintained by the licenced stamp vendors under Rule 52 of the Kerala Manufacture and Sale of Stamp Rules, 1960 . Therefore, petitioner had the responsibility to maintain such register safely. As against this, in the enquiry when he was called upon to produce the register, he took the position that the document was lost. If the document were WPC No. 22739/08 :3 : actually lost, at that time, the matter has to be reported, which was not done and therefore, that theory of the petitioner itself is most unbelievable. 3. These are misconducts of a licenced stamp vendor and in such circumstances, if the licencing authority, Government thought that cancellation of the licence is the appropriate punishment, this Court will not be justified in interfering with the same. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp