IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1912 of 2009()
1. FR.MATHEW NARIKKUZHI, MANAGER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE INSPECTOR,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.S.R.BANNURMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :25/08/2009
O R D E R
S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.A.No.1912 OF 2009
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 25th day of August 2009
JUDGMENT
A.K.BASHEER, J.
Appellant who claims to be the Manager of M/S Haritha Cashews,
Kunnoth, Kiliyanthara in Kannur district has preferred this writ appeal
impugning the judgment passed by the Learned Single Judge.
2. In the writ petition, appellant/petitioner had sought for quashing
Ext.P6 final assessment order passed by the competent authority under
the Kerala Cashew Workers Relief and Welfare Fund Act, 1979 and the
Schemes framed thereunder.
3. In the nature of the order that we propose to pass, it is not
necessary for us to delve deep into the entire matter or to deal with the
various contentions raised by the appellant as regards the tenability of the
order.
4. By Ext.P3 notice issued by respondent No.1, appellant was
directed to show cause why prosecution shall not be initiated against him
for violation of the provisions of the Act. But curiously a provisional
determination order dated, June 1, 2009 was also sent along with Ext.P3
notice informing the appellant that final determination order will be
passed, if sufficient cause was not shown within seven days from the date
W.A.No.1912 OF 2009
:: 2 ::
of receipt of the provisional determination order. Appellant has got a
specific case that the show cause notice and provisional order were
received only on the last day of the month of June. It can be seen from
Ext.P4 postal cover that it was posted only on June 23, 2009. Though the
appellant requested to grant him a short further time, respondent No.1
passed Ext.P6 final determination order on July 6, 2009 without affording
the appellant any opportunity of being heard.
5. Having perused the materials placed before us, we have no
hesitation to hold that there is grave infraction of the rules of natural
justice. We are satisfied that the appellant has to be afforded sufficient
opportunity before any liability is fastened on him. Therefore, Ext.P6
order is quashed. The competent authority shall issue fresh notice to the
appellant and afford him sufficient opportunity to be heard before any
orders are passed. We make it clear that we have not considered the
merit of any of the contentions raised by the appellant/petitioner.
Writ appeal is disposed of.
(S.R.BANNURMATH)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(A.K.BASHEER)
JUDGE
jes