IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 2298 of 2009(W)
1. M/S.V.S.ALEX
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :21/01/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
-----------------------
W.P.(C).No.2298/2009
------------------------
Dated this the 21th day of January, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner submits that his father Late V.S. Alex was
granted licence to import kerosene. On the expiry of his
father, the licence was transferred in favour of the firm, of
which the petitioner is the managing partner. Ext.P1 is the
licence so issued. According to the petitioner, the licence
was renewed from time to time. However, by Ext.P5 the
licence was ordered to be cancelled for the reasons stated
therein. Petitioner filed Ext.P6 appeal but the same was
returned, directing the petitioner to approach the
competent authority as per Ext.P11 proceedings. There
upon the petitioner filed Ext.P12 appeal before the 3rd
respondent. The appeal is dated 26.11.2008 and according
to the petitioner the appeal has not been considered and
orders have not been passed. In the meanwhile on the
WP(c).No.2298/09 2
strength of the direction issued by this court in Ext.P8
judgment in WP(c).No.28806/08, the petitioner continued the
dealership. It is stated that, during the pendency of Ext.P12
appeal, the Taluk Supply Officer Thiruvalla has issued Ext.P13
proceedings dated 17.1.2009, suspending the licence and
making alternate arrangements for the supply of kerosene to
the area covered by the petitioner. It is in these circumstances
the writ petion s filed.
2. Admittedly, Ext.P12 appeal filed by the petitioner
before the 3rd respondent is pending consideration. Till now,
in spite of Ext.P5, the petitioner has been supplying kerosene.
Therefore, at this stage, in my view, Ext.P13 was unnecessary
and the proper course was to have awaited for the outcome of
Ext.P12.
3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing
the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P12
appeal filed by the petitioner with notice to him, as
expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks from
WP(c).No.2298/09 3
the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Subject to
the condition that a copy of the judgment will be produced
before the 3rd respondent before 2nd of February, 2009. It is
directed that further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P13 will be
kept in abeyance pending disposal of Ext.P12 appeal and the
petitioner will be permitted to continue the business.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before
the 3rd respondent and the Taluk Supply officer, Thiruvalla,
who has issued Ext.P13.
(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/
WP(c).No.2298/09 4