The High Court, in a writ petition, held that the second proviso to Rule 7 (2) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002, extends an exemption to shops relying on prior notifications even if the shop was not licenced in the immediately preceding abkari year.
The writ petition was allowed as prayed for; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 34249 of 2007(B) --------------------------
PETITIONER: ------------
UDAYAMMA MANOHARAN, W/O LATE K.K.MANOHARAN, KOCHUKAYALCHIRA, PONGA, KAINAKARI, KUTTANAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. (LICENSEE OF GROUP NO.VII OF KUTTANAD EXCISE RANGE)
BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY
RESPONDENTS:
BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
W.P(C).No.34249 OF 2007
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008
JUDGMENT
The effect of the second proviso to Rule 7 (2) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002, hereinafter, 'the Rules', as substituted with effect from 9.7.2004 as per SRO.No.715/04, falls for consideration in this case.
WPC.34249/07
Page numbers
“Provided further that the restrictions regarding distance from an educational institution, temple, church, mosque, burial ground and Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes Colonies for locating toddy shops shall not apply to those shops which remained unlicenced for want of unobjectionable site and which are for that reason sought to be located at the same place where they were licenced in previous years availing of the exemptions given to them by notifications/Government Orders in this regard”.
(emphasis supplied)
WPC.34249/07
Page numbers
The aforequoted second proviso was brought in by substituting the earlier one, which read as following:
“Provided further that the restrictions in distance from education institution, temple, church, mosque, burial ground and Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes Colonies for locating toddy shops shall not apply to those shops which remained unlicenced for want of any unobjectionable site, but were to be located at the same place where they were licenced for the year 2001-2002.”
WPC.34249/07
Page numbers
Rule 7 (2) of the Rules has been made to provide the benefit of such exemption being available to shops which were licenced during the previous years, availing exemptions. The Government have, in their wisdom, chosen to have the second proviso as it now stands, thereby extending the benefit of that exemption to be dependent of the fact that a shop was licenced in the previous years. Hence, notwithstanding that the shop in question was not licenced during the immediately preceding abkari year, a shop functioning with the benefit of exemption on the basis of prior notifications would fall within the class of shops, for which, exemption is extended by the Government as per the second proviso to Rule 7 (2) as it now stands. It is so declared.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed as prayed for. No costs.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge
kkb.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second proviso to Rule 7 (2) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 applies to a licensee whose shop was not licenced in the immediately preceding abkari year?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
UDAYAMMA MANOHARAN
STATE OF KERALA
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
