IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34954 of 2009(L)
1. S.RAJU, S/O. P.K.SREEDHARAN, AGED 42
... Petitioner
Vs
1. C.S.CHITHRAN CHITRALAYAM, AASRAMAM WARD,
... Respondent
2. P.V.ANANDAN, VELIYIL HOUSE, KOMMADY
3. THE COMMISSIONR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA
5. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA
6. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER,
7. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :17/12/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J
.......................
W.P.(C).34954/2009
.......................
Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009
JUDGMENT
By a notification dated 24.1.2005, the District Supply
Officer, Alappuzha, invited applications from eligible persons
for appointment as the licencee of ARD No.80 in Ambalapuzha
Taluk. The petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 and others applied.
By Ext.P1 order passed on 27.4.2005 the District Supply
Officer appointed the petitioner as the licencee to run ARD
No.80 in Ambalapuzha Taluk. The first respondent challenged
the said order by filing an appeal before the District Collector.
By Ext.P2 order passed on 11.1.2005, the appeal was
dismissed. The first respondent thereupon filed a revision
petition before the Commissioner of Civil Supplies. By Ext.P3
order passed on 12.11.2009 the revision petition was allowed,
the order appointing the petitioner as the licencee of ARD
No.80 was set aside and the District Supply Officer was
directed to appoint the first respondent as the licensee of ARD
No.80. The petitioner has aggrieved thereby, filed Ext.P4
revision petition accompanied by Ext.P4(a) stay petition before
the Honourable Minister for Food and Civil Supplies. This
W.P.(C).34954/09
2
writ petition was filed shortly thereafter challenging Ext.P3
and seeking a direction to the Government to consider Ext.P4
revision petition and pass orders thereon within a time limit
to be fixed by this Court. The petitioner also seeks stay of
operation of Ext.P3 order till such time as the revision petition
is heard and disposed of.
2. The pleadings disclose that the petitioner was
appointed as the licensee of ARD No.80, by Ext.P1 order,
more than four years back. That order was set aside only on
12.11.2009. Clause 71 of the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966
entitles the petitioner to challenge Ext.P3 by filing a revision
petition before the State Government. Since the petitioner
has invoked the remedy thus available to him in law, having
regard to the fact that he has been running ARD No.80 for the
past more than four years, I am of the opinion that the
Government should consider Ext.P4 revision petition and
pass orders thereon expeditiously. If pending the revision
petition, the order passed by the Commissioner of Civil
Supplies is given effect to, and the first respondent is
appointed as the licensee of ARD No.80, the remedy available
to the petitioner will be rendered meaningless. I am
W.P.(C).34954/09
3
therefore of the considered opinion that till such time, as
orders are passed on Ext.P4, the operation of Ext.P3 should
be kept in abeyance.
I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a
direction to the Government of Kerala to consider Ext.P4
revision petition and pass orders thereon after notice to and
affording the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2 a reasonable
opportunity of being heard. Final orders in the matter shall
be passed within three months from the date on which the
Secretary to Government, Food and Civil Supplies
Department receives or the petitioner produces before him a
certified copy of this judgment. The Government shall after
orders are passed as directed above, communicate copies
thereof to the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2. Till such
time as orders are passed and communicated to the petitioner
and respondents 1 and 2, further proceedings pursuant to
Ext.P3 order passed by the Commissioner shall be kept in
abeyance.
P.N.RAVINDRAN,
Judge
mrcs