Allowed

Juliet E. J. v. the District Supply Officer

Kerala HC17 Sept 2021WP(C)/18629/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court set aside an order dismissing the petitioner's appeal because the authority hearing her case was different from the one issuing the order. The fourth respondent is directed to reconsider the appeal after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within three months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside. Fourth respondent directed to consider the appeal afresh after affording opportunity of hearing within three months.

Juliet E. J. Vs the District Supply Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA,

¶4

1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 18629 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

JULIET E. J. AGED 70 YEARS W/O ANTONY M. L., MANTHRA HOUSE, PERUMPILLY NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 505.

¶8

BY ADV S.SUDHISH KUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, COLLECTORATE COMPLEX, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

¶11

¶12

TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER , KOCHI TALUK, KOCHI - 682 002.

¶13

3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN CODE - 682 030.

¶14

4 THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, UMS, VELLAYAMBALAM ROAD, VALAYAM - TRIVANDRUM - 595033.

¶15

BY SRI.S.RENJITH, SPL.GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR

¶17

ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

W.P.(C) No.18629 of 2021

¶19

..2..

¶20

W.P.(C)No.18629 of 2021

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

Petitioner was an Authorised Ration Dealer. The licence granted to the petitioner was cancelled by the third respondent in terms of Ext.P7 order. Ext.P7 order was challenged by the petitioner in Ext.P8 appeal before the fourth respondent. Ext.P8 appeal has now been dismissed by the fourth respondent as per Ext.P10 order. Ext.P10 order is under challenge in the writ petition mainly on the ground that she was heard on Ext.P8 appeal by the Director of Civil Supplies and not by the fourth respondent. In other words, according to the petitioner, Ext.P10 order is one issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Special Government Pleader.

¶24

The fact that the fourth respondent has not afforded the petitioner an opportunity of hearing before

¶25

W.P.(C) No.18629 of 2021

¶26

..3..

¶27

passing Ext.P10 order is not disputed. It is settled that one who hears should decide.

¶28

In the said view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside and the fourth respondent is directed to consider Ext.P8 appeal preferred by the petitioner afresh after affording her an opportunity of hearing. This shall be done within three months.

¶29

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶30

rkj

¶31

W.P.(C) No.18629 of 2021

¶32

..4..

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18629/2021

¶34

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶35

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.9572/2017 DATED 18.04.2017 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C.S.56180/2012 DATED 08.05.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶36

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2017 BEARING NO.CS-5-6180/2012 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶37

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.35589/2017(W) DATED 29.11.2017 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C.S. 5- 6180/2012 DATED 23.02.2018 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 7294/2018 (J) DATED 28.01.2020 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DCEKM/2290/2020/S7 DATED 20.03.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL NO. OF 2020 FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE DATED 08.03.2021 BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF THE CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶38

Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.(C.S.)A8688/2020 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 12.07.2021.

Juliet E. J. v. the District Supply Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juliet E. J. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajesh Kumar P.H. Vs Chola Mandalam Investment Finance Company Ltd.

DM Education and Research Foundation Vs Dr.Vipul Aggarwal

M.Anitha Vs v.P.Joy

Unnikrishnan Nair, Vs the District Level Authorization Committee

Ms.Swachanda Roy, Vs State of Kerala

S.Sidharth Nair Vs State of Kerala