IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20412 of 2010(B)
1. P.R.CHELLAPPAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :31/08/2010
O R D E R
P.N. RAVINDRAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C) No. 20412 OF 2010
= = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the licensee of Toddy Shops Nos. 66 to 70 in Group
No. XII of Kanjirappally Range in Kottayam Division, for the current year
(2010-11). He holds Ext.P1 toddy transport permit issued by the Deputy
Excise Commissioner, Palakkad, dated 29.3.2010, permitting him to
transport toddy from Chittur Range to Kanjirappally Range in vehicles
bearing Reg. Nos. KL 36A- 2826 or KL5 V-5582 between 6 AM ad 3
P.M. daily once (via) Vadakkancherry – Kombazha – Angamali –
Kuruvilangad – Pala – Paika. The said permit is valid till 30.9.2010. This
writ petition is filed contending that the petitioner is entitled to transport
toddy in both the vehicles on alternate days and that the respondents are not
permitting him to transport toddy in both the vehicles. According to the
petitioner, it is for him to decide in which vehicle toddy should be
transported and that the respondents cannot insist that only one among the
two vehicles shall be used.
2. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the
respondents submits that a large number of similar writ petitions raising
WP(C) 20412/2010 2
similar contentions were filed in this Court and that pursuant to the
directions issued by this Court, the Excise Commissioner has passed an
order dated 22.7.2010, modifying his earlier order. A copy of the said
order has been made available to me and it reads as follows:
“As per the D.O. letter read 1st paper and the
proceedings that ensued vide 2nd paper above, it
was directed to limit the issue of toddy transport
permit to one vehicle only.
Several writ petitions have been filed before
the Hon’ble High Court and representations
submitted before Government and the
Commissionerate by the licensees and Abkari
Trade Unions against the said directive. The
Hon’ble High Court in its order read as 3rd above,
also ordered to consider the representation of the
petitioner therein requesting permit for two
vehicles in one permit for transporting toddy. A
meeting was convened by the undersigned with the
licensees of Kottayam District on 17.7.2010
wherein, the difficulties faced as a result of the
above directions was discussed.
Accordingly, in partial modification of the
order read as 2nd above, it is directed to mention
registration numbers of two vehicles in the toddy
transport permit, subject to the condition that the
licensees could use only one vehicle at a time for
transporting toddy, as per the permit. The licensee
will be entitled to put to use the other vehicle
mentioned in the permit only in the event of any
accident, or mechanical failure or otherwise of the
vehicle in use after intimating the Deputy
Commissioners of the respective Divisions.
The order read 2nd stands modified as above
WP(C) 20412/2010 3
and all the Deputy Commissioners are directed to
scrupulously follow the instructions detailed,
without fail.”
In the light of the aforesaid development and the fact that the
petitioner has not chosen to challenge the said order, I am of the opinion hat
the writ petition can be disposed of with the observation that the petitioner
shall comply with the order passed by the Excise Commissioner on
22.7.2010 while transporting toddy on the strength of Ext.P1 permit.
P.N. RAVINDRAN,
(JUDGE)
knc/-