The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ petition challenging penalties imposed on an Authorised Wholesale Distributor for stock variations in ration articles. The court rejected claims of error in calculation methods and procedural delays.
The writ petition was dismissed upholding the recovery orders against the petitioner.
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 N.NAGARESH
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH 2021/17TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.1918 OF 2019(L)
PETITIONER:
FRANCIS VADAKKEL, S/O.THOMAS, VADAKKEL HOUSE, BYSON VALLEY P.O., UDUMBANCHOLA, IDUKKI.
BY ADVS.
SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN SMT.NEENU PAVITHRAN
RESPONDENTS:
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 2 :
N. NAGARESH, J.
W.P.(C) No.1918 of 2019
Dated this the 8th day of March, 2021
J U D G M E N T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The petitioner, an Authorised Wholesale Distributor appointed under the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966, is challenging Exts.P5, P7 and P9 Orders.
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 3 :
alleged inspection conducted on 30.10.2010. The notice was served on the petitioner after four years of inspection. An amount of `6,59,532/- was sought to be recovered from the petitioner. No calculation statement was given to the petitioner.
6,59,532/towards economic cost of ration articles found in stock variation and an amount of 5,000/- was ordered to be recovered as fine, as per Ext.P5 proceedings dated 04.07.2017.WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 4 :
The petitioner preferred Ext.P8 Revision Petition before the Government. The Government also rejected the Revision Petition as per Ext.P9 order dated 15.12.2018. Aggrieved by Exts.P5, P7 and P9, the petitioner is before this Court.
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 5 :
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 6 :
No.34445/2010. Economic rate is the actual value of the ration articles without subsidy. The petitioner has misappropriated ration articles and hence he is bound to pay the amount.
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 7 :
of the ration articles was calculated based on economic price. The value ought to have been calculated at market rates. The respondents have adopted a price themselves to arrive at amount to be recovered. However, it has been stated in the counter affidavit that ‘Economic rate’ is the cost of the ration articles without applying subsidy. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in recovering amounts calculating the dues at economic rate.
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 8 :
pending before the Director of Civil Supplies and W.P.(C) No.34445/2010 filed by the petitioner was also pending. It was these proceedings which caused delay in taking action. Furthermore, it is to be noted that the petitioner has not pointed out any specific prejudice occurred to him due to the delay in initiating the proceedings. In the circumstances, this Court finds no reason to accept the argument of the petitioner in this regard.
In view of the facts and reasons stated above, this Court finds no illegality in Exts.P5, P7 and P9. The writ petition is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/04.03.2021
WP(C) No.1918/2019
: 9 :
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 30.10.2014. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION NOTE DATED 30.10.2010 SIGNED BY THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER AND THE RATIONING INSPECTOR. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.12.2014. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY DATED 21.7.16. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NUMBER (CS)B2-4780/12 DATED 4.7.17 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 20.7.17 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NUMBER (CS)A5-18870/17 DATED 13.12.17 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 7.2.18. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 15.12.2018. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. CS 4-959/10 DATED 11.07.2019 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. CS 4-959/10 DATED 18.01.2021. ncd
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the quantification of ration stock variation at economic rate and the inspection method were illegal under the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966.
Whether the delay of over three years in initiating proceedings against the petitioner caused substantial prejudice warranting quashing.
Francis Vadakkel
Government of Kerala
Commissioner of Civil Supplies, Thiruvananthapuram
District Collector, Civil Station, Idukki
District Supply Officer, Civil Station, Idukki
Taluk Supply Officer, Udumbanchola Taluk, Nedumkandom
N. Nagaresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court