High Court Kerala High Court

P.R.Pavithran vs State Of Kerala on 16 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.R.Pavithran vs State Of Kerala on 16 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7077 of 2009(D)


1. P.R.PAVITHRAN, AGED 75 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.N.SASI, AGED 55 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER,

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,

4. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :16/03/2009

 O R D E R
                          S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                  ------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C)No. 7077 OF 2009
                ----------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 16th day of March, 2009

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P6 order, whereby the

petitioners’ toddy shop licence has been cancelled on the grounds

stated therein. The petitioners challenge the same primarily on

the ground that before passing Ext.P6 order, the petitioners have

not been afforded an opportunity of being heard. In the above

circumstances, I directed the learned Government Pleader to

obtain instructions as to whether the petitioners have been heard

before passing Ext.P6 order. Today, the learned Government

Pleader submits that the petitioners were not given a personal

hearing, since in the objection filed by the petitioners to the show

cause notice cum suspension order, they have not specifically

requested for a personal hearing.

2. I am of opinion that in so far as the order affects the

civil rights of the petitioners, even though the petitioners had not

asked for a personal hearing, the petitioners should have been

granted one.

W.P.(c)No.7077/09 2

In the above circumstances, Ext.P6 is in violation of the

principles of natural justice. Accordingly, Ext.P6 is quashed.

The 2nd respondent is directed to pass fresh orders in the

matter, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the

petitioners. Fresh orders in this regard shall be passed as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd

W.P.(c)No.7077/09 3