Disposed

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. v. Circle Inspector of Excise and Others

Kerala HC5 Aug 2011WP(C)/15961/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, the Court directed the Commissioner of Excise to consider the petitioner's objection while processing a bar licence application by the 7th respondent, noting an existing direction in another operation to consider the grant.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Commissioner of Excise to consider the petitioner's objection while considering the application of the 7th respondent for a bar licence.

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. Vs Circle Inspector of Excise… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933

¶4

WP(C).No. 15961 of 2011(S) --------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

---------------

¶7

ADV. SURESH BABU P.K., GENERAL SECRETARY, MADHYA VIRUDHA JANAKEEYA SAMITHY, THRISSUR JILLA COMMITTEE, NANDHANAM APPARTMENTS 'C' BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, AYYANTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR-3.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.C.PRABIN BENNY

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

---------------

¶11

1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, VADANAPPALLY, POKKALANGARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶12

2. DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER, EXCISE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-3.

¶13

3. JOINT EXCISE COMMISSIONER(CENTRAL ZONE), JOINT EXCISE COMMISSIONER OFFICE, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

4. EXCISE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

5. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TAX, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

6. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

W.P.(C) NO.15961/2011

¶18

7. SMT. NASHA E.D., W/O. SRI. P.K.SHELLY, MANAGING PARTNER, KUNNATHUR MANA, AYURVEDA HERITAGE, PUNNAYOORKULAM, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR.

¶19

ADD.R8: ASOKAN K.K., AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.LATE K.G.KARUNAKARA MENON NALAPPAT HOUSE, KUPRAVALLY DESOM, PUNNAYOORKULAM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.

¶20

(IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.8 VIDE ORDER DT.3.8.2011 IN I.A.NO.12176/2011)

¶21

GOVT.PLEADER, SRI.BENNY GERVASIS.

¶22

ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN FOR R7 SRI.NIREESH MATHEW FOR R7 SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT FOR ADDL.R8

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

W.P.(C) NO.15961/2011

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.25.2.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MINISTER OF EXCISE.

¶27

EXT.P1(a): COPY OF THE TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE INTIMATION DT.8.3.2010. EXT.P2(a): COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P2. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.7.6.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶28

EXT.P3(a): COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P3. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CAR. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE STRIKE. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE MASS PETITION DT.9.10.2011 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶29

EXT.P6(a): COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P6.

¶30

//TRUE COPY//

¶31

PA TO JUDGE

¶32

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.

¶33

W.P.(C).No.15961 OF 2011

¶34

Dated this the 5^th day of August, 2011

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

~~~~~~~~~~~

¶37

C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶38

This Public Interest Litigation is filed challenging the 7^th respondent's entitlement for a bar licence in the star hotel they have established. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the licence is not so far granted. There is already a direction issued by this Court in another O.P. to consider 7^th respondent's application for grant of licence. Since already there is a direction to consider grant of licence to the 7^th respondent, we feel the Commissioner can consider the petitioner's objection also. There is no need for this Court to consider whether the objection raised by the petitioner is sufficient to decline the licence to the 7^th respondent. We dispose of the W.P.(C) directing the Commissioner of Excise to consider petitioner's objection also while considering the application of the 7^th respondent for licence.

¶39

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

¶40

( P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE)

¶41

Ps/6/8

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. v. Circle Inspector of Excise and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. v. Circle Inspector of Excise and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagratha Samithi Vs Joseph

M.Abin Suraj Vs Dr.P.P.Mohammed

The Administrator,Utl and Another Vs Sajitha Beegum and Another

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe Vs Babu Thomas

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. Vs the Agricultural Income Tax

Dr.Sujatha Rani Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.Rep.by the Chief Ma