Disposed

Janeesh K. v. the District Supply Officer

Kerala HC11 Jun 2018WP(C)/16516/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the Taluk Supply Officer to finally dispose of the petitioner's application for a permanent ARD license within two months, considering the inspection report and relevant government orders, after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's application and decide it within two months after affording an opportunity of participation.

Janeesh K. Vs the District Supply Officer — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 16516 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER(S)

¶7

JANEESH K. S/O.UNNI@ ITTIRI, AGED 37 YEARS, KOLLATHEDATH HOUSE, THEKKANKUTTOR P.O, VIA KALPAKANCHERY, MALAPPURAM - 676 551.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI.G.UNNIKRISHNAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER

¶11

COLLECTORATE BUILDING, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.

¶12

2. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER,

¶13

TIRUR, NAZEEM COMPLEX, NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, TIRUR -676 101.

¶14

3. THE SECRETARY,

¶15

TIRUR CO-OPERATIVE RURAL BANK, TIRUR - 676 101.

¶16

4. THE COMMISSIONER,

¶17

FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,

¶18

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 1.

¶19

R1, R2 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.VINEETHA.B

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-06-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No. 16516 of 2018 (L)

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶24

EXHIBIT	P1	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DT. 28.4.05 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P2	TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 30.01.09 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P3	TRUE COPY OF REPORT DT. 11.02.09 OF THE RATIONING INSPECTOR.
EXHIBIT	P4	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DT. 24.02.09 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT. 24.02.09 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P6	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT. 10.09.12 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MINISTER FOR FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES.
EXHIBIT	P7	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT. 17.03.16 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P8	TRUE COPY INSPECTION REPORT DT. NIL SUBMITTED BY THE RATIONING INSPECTOR TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT 4TH	P9	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. DT. 23.01.02 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 05.2.04 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPOND -------	ENT(S)' -------	EXHIBITS : NIL ----------

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

SPV

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶29

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 16516 of 2018

¶30

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11^th day of June, 2018

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-

¶33

“1. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 1^st respondent to grant permanent license to the petitioner to run ARD 85 situated in Tirur Taluk based on Exhibit P8 report of the Rationing Inspector;

¶34

To issue such other writ, direction or order as deemed fit in the nature and circumstances of the case.”

¶35

Petitioner was the sales man of Authorized Ration

¶36

Depot No. 85 from 2003. The licensee of the said ARD was the 3^rd respondent, a Co-operative Society. However, due to loss, the 3^rd respondent surrendered many of the ARD shops, of which, it has the licenses. The 3^rd respondent has also written to the 1^st respondent that the license should be granted to the petitioner. Petitioner, in accordance with 2^nd proviso to sub clause 2 of clause 45 of the Kerala Rationing Order 1966, has submitted an application to confer the ARD license to the petitioner.

¶37

W.P.(C) No.16516 of 2018

¶38

-:2:-

¶39

Accordingly, an enquiry was made and Ext.P8 report is drawn. It is also submitted that, under similar circumstances,

¶40

State Government has passed Exts. P9 and P10 orders. Petitioner seeks appropriate direction for consideration of the application submitted, taking into account Ext.P8 report and Exts. P9 and P10 orders passed by the State Government.

¶41

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, there will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to attain finality to the application submitted by the petitioner, pertaining to Ext.P8 report, taking into account the said report as well as Exts.P9 and P10 Government Orders, at the earliest possible time, and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after providing an opportunity of participation to the petitioner.

¶42

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶43

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶44

SPV/11.06.18

¶45

//TRUE COPY//

¶46

PA TO JUDGE

Janeesh K. v. the District Supply Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janeesh K. v. the District Supply Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.R.Rajaesh Vs the Additional District Magistrate

Dominic a Vs Kerala Water Authority

Dominic a Vs Kerala Water Authority

The Manager High School Thiruvalayannar Vs the Deputy Tahsildar

Syamala Vs the State of Kerala

P. Mohan Kumar Vs the District Collector, Pathanamthitta