IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 9208 of 2008(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.N. HARIAPPAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, PATTARATHARA HOUSE, THOTTAKAM P.O., VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, VAIKOM. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, VAIKOM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA FOR R.1TO5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.9208 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 11th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is one of the licensees of toddy shops in Group VIII of Vaikom Excise Range. In respect of one toddy shop, viz. T.S.No.48 in that range for which licence was issued to the petitioner for the year 2007-08, the petitioner could not conduct business smoothly on account of unjustified intervention of workers and their unions with political support. On the ground that the toddy shop has not functioned during the year, the Excise Authorities decided to abolish that toddy shop. On account of having conducted a toddy shop in the group earlier, the petitioner as a co-licensee is entitled to preference in the matter of grant of licence this year also. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and his co-licensee were entitled to get licence in respect of all the toddy shops in the said Group including toddy shop No.48. In view of the proposal for abolition of toddy shop No.48, the petitioner apprehends that licence will not be issued in respect of that shop. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or such other writ, direction or order commanding respondents not to abolish/cancel T.S.No.48/07-08 (Maniyankunnu Shop) in Group VIII of Vaikom Excise Range under Kottayam Excise Division. (ii) issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or such other writ, 2 direction or order declaring that the proposal to cancel T.S.No.48/07-08 in Group VIII of Vaikom Excise Range is arbitrary and illegal. (iii) issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or such other writ, direction or order to conduct an enquiry and collect statements from the petitioner and the workers attached to T.S.No.48/07-08 before taking any steps to cancel/abolish T.S.No.48.” 2. A statement has been filed by the 3rd respondent, in which it has been stated that the petitioner and his co-licensee were not able to handle the labour problems of the toddy shop effectively, as a result of which, the toddy shop remained closed for the entire year and that is the reason for deciding to abolish the toddy shop. 3. This is disputed by the counsel for the petitioner. According to the petitioner, although the toddy shop functioned irregularly, it is not correct that the toddy shop did not function at all. Further, he would contend that when the situation arose not because of any fault on the licensees, they should not be penalised for the same. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 5. The questions as to whether the toddy shop functioned for some time and whether only on account of labour trouble the toddy shop should be abolished, are matters on which a decision should be taken by the 2nd respondent by proper application of mind after hearing the petitioner also. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: Within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of 3 this judgment, the 2nd respondent shall issue a notice to the petitioner and his co-licensee putting forward the proposal for abolition of toddy shop No.48 in Vaikom Excise Range giving the reasons for the same. The petitioner shall file his objections within two weeks from the date of receipt of the notice. The 2nd respondent shall take a decision in the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and after considering all aspects of the matter giving reasons, within one month therefrom. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge