High Court Kerala High Court

C.B.Gopakumar vs Ramdas on 2 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
C.B.Gopakumar vs Ramdas on 2 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 16157 of 2010(T)


1. C.B.GOPAKUMAR, AGED 31 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. RAMDAS, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, THACHOTH HOUSE
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, EXCISE,

3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :02/06/2010

 O R D E R
                     K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
                 -----------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C) No.16157 of 2010
                 -----------------------------------------
               Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a toddy worker registered under the

Toddy Workers Welfare fund Scheme. He has been

continuously working in the Thozhupadam toddy shop within the

Vadakkancherry Excise Range for the past many years. As per

the new Abkari policy of the State Government, the toddy shops

are licensed on group basis i.e. by clubbing six toddy shops in

an area into a group and each group is licensed to a contractor.

The first respondent is the licensee in respect of the group in

which the Thozhupadam toddy shop is included. The complaint

of the petitioner is that the first respondent did not renew the

license in respect of shop No.23, the Thozhupadam toddy shop,

though he has renewed the licenses in respect of all the other

shops in the said group. He has submitted Ext.P2

representation before the second respondent detailing his

grievances.

2. Since Ext.P2 has already been submitted to the second

respondent, who is the competent authority to redress the

wpc No.16157/2010 2

grievances of the petitioner, I do not propose to consider the

contentions of the petitioner on the merits.

3. This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing the

second respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation in

accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon as

expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after

giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as

other interested persons.

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge

css/