Toddy shop licensees challenged the closure and cancellation of their licence after toddy samples allegedly showed starch under a Section 57A violation, arguing the unexamined third sample meant the substance was not noxious. The court held the matter was covered by earlier judgments and dismissed the writ petition.
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.
WP(C) No. 35577 of 2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 35577 OF 2016
PETITIONERS:
1 P.D.JAYAN AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. DAMODARAN, LITTLE FLOWER KAVILAYIL, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT
2 VINEESH U
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. UPENDRAN, J U MANDIRAM, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT
BY ADVS.SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.RAMPRASAD UNNI SMT.ASHA BABU SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR
SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
SRI.SABIN BABU
RESPONDENT:
THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SAYED M. THANGAL.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No. 35577 of 2016
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 24th day of July 2024
The Writ Petition is preferred by the licensees of T.S. No.10 in Kuruvanpalam in Kollam District, falling under Group-II of Kollam range. The grievance was against the direction as per Ext.P4 order to close down the toddy shop owned by the petitioner.
WP(C) No. 35577 of 2016
3
is covered against the petitioner in judgment reported in P.P. Pradeepkumar v.
Excise Commissioner & Ors . [2015 (2) KHC 190] and MUraleedharan C. v.
State of Kerala & Ors . [2011 KHC 2372 Online].
In the light of the reported decisions above, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
P.M.MANOJ, JUDGE
sss
WP(C) No. 35577 of 2016
4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35577/2016
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS :
EXHIBI P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OCCURRENCE REPORT IN CR NO 294 OF 2016
EXHIBI P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16-09-2016 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT EXHIBI P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 17-10-2016
EXHIBI P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 25-10-2016 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS :
EXHIBI R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 01.09.20216
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the cancellation of the petitioners' toddy shop licence following alleged Section 57A Abkari Act violations could be challenged when sample 'C' was not chemically examined.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.P. Pradeepkumar v. Excise Commissioner & OrsRelied on¶4
2015 (2) KHC 190
Muraleedharan C. v. State of Kerala & OrsRelied on¶4
2011 KHC 2372 Online
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.D.Jayan
Vineesh U
The Excise Commissioner, Commissionerate of Excise, Thiruvananthapuram
P.M.Manoj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
