{"id":229218,"date":"2010-09-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010"},"modified":"2017-06-23T19:52:12","modified_gmt":"2017-06-23T14:22:12","slug":"c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWA.No. 1458 of 2010()\n\n\n1. C.A.RAFI, S\/O. ANTHONI,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF\n\n3. THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.J.CHELAMESWAR\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON\n\n Dated :09\/09\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                        J.Chelameswar,C.J. &\n                     P.R.Ramachandra Menon,J.\n                   --------------------------------------------\n                        W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n                   --------------------------------------------\n            Dated, this the 9th day of September, 2010\n\n                               JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
J.Chelameswar, C.J.:\n<\/p>\n
            Aggrieved by a judgment dated 17th June, 2010 in W.P.<\/p>\n
(C).No.18876 of 2010, the unsuccessful petitioner therein preferred<\/p>\n
the present appeal.\n<\/p>\n
            2. It appears from the judgment under appeal that the<\/p>\n
appellant along with two others are the joint owners of a particular<\/p>\n
piece of property. In the said piece of property a granite quarry exists.<\/p>\n
One of the co-owners, Mr.Paulson, allegedly transferred his interest<\/p>\n
in the said property in favour of the appellant herein. For the purpose<\/p>\n
of quarrying, it appears that explosives were being used and initially a<\/p>\n
licence under the provisions of the Explosives Act, 1884, hereafter<\/p>\n
referred to as “the Act” read with the Explosives Rules, 1983 was<\/p>\n
issued in favour of the abovementioned Paulson.<\/p>\n
            3. Consequent to the alleged transfer of interest in the<\/p>\n
property, the appellant herein made an application seeking transfer of<\/p>\n
the above mentioned licence in favour of the appellant herein. Along<\/p>\n
with the said application, the appellant also produced a letter (Ext.P3)<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 2 –\n<\/p>\n
allegedly from the original licensee, i.e., Paulson, to the effect that the<\/p>\n
original licensee does not have any objection to the transfer of the<\/p>\n
licence.\n<\/p>\n
            4. By the impugned order under Ext.P6 the first respondent<\/p>\n
herein directed the appellant herein to submit a fresh application<\/p>\n
(obviously seeking appropriate licence). The relevant portion of the<\/p>\n
said order reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
             “Since the title of the premises in Sy.No.1069\/2,3 in<\/p>\n
      Chengaloor Village for which the No Objection Certificate was<\/p>\n
      granted was transferred to S\/Sri.C.A.Raphy and P.L. Raphy<\/p>\n
      recommendation is hereby issued, for cancelling the No<\/p>\n
      Objection Certificate granted to Sri.K.I.Paulson as per Rule 115<\/p>\n
      (1)(a) of the Explosive Rules 2008. At the same, Sri.C.A.Raphy is<\/p>\n
      hereby directed to submit a fresh application, as per Explosive<\/p>\n
      Act for granting No Objection Certificate\/Licence for the<\/p>\n
      possession and use of the explosives in the above mentioned<\/p>\n
      premises”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            5.    The licence in issue was initially given under the<\/p>\n
Explosive Rules, 1983 in favour of Mr.Paulson which, it appears, was<\/p>\n
renewed from time to time.\n<\/p>\n
            6. Section 5 of the Explosives Act, 1884, hereinafter<\/p>\n
referred to as “the Act”, authorises the Government of India to make<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                     – 3 –\n<\/p>\n
rules consistent with the provisions of the Act to regulate or prohibit<\/p>\n
the manufacture, possession, use, sale, transport, import and export of<\/p>\n
explosives. Such a regulation or prohibition can be either of all the<\/p>\n
explosives or the specified class of explosives. However, the use of<\/p>\n
explosives is permitted under and in accordance with the conditions of<\/p>\n
licence granted under the Act and the Rules. Section 5(1) reads as<\/p>\n
follows:-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            “5(1) The Central Government may, for any part of India<\/p>\n
      make rules consistent with this Act to regulate or prohibit,<\/p>\n
      except under and in accordance with the conditions of a licence<\/p>\n
      granted as provided by those rules, the manufacture,<\/p>\n
      possession, use, sale, transport, import and export of<\/p>\n
      explosives, or any specified class of explosives”.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Section 5(2) authorises the making of the rules for various purposes<\/p>\n
enumerated therein, the details of which are not necessary for the<\/p>\n
present case. Section 6B stipulates that whenever an application<\/p>\n
seeking a licence under the Act is made, the same is either required<\/p>\n
to be    granted or    refused    after making an appropriate enquiry.<\/p>\n
Section 6C enumerates the various circumstances in which the<\/p>\n
licencing authority is mandated to refuse a licence. However, such a<\/p>\n
refusal is subject to the further condition that the reasons for such<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                  – 4 –\n<\/p>\n
refusal are required to be recorded and furnished to the applicant on<\/p>\n
demand.\n<\/p>\n
            7. Various rules are framed in exercise of the powers<\/p>\n
conferred under Sections 5 and 7 of the Act from time to time. The<\/p>\n
latest set of rules is made in the year 2008, called “The Explosives<\/p>\n
Rules, 2008”. By Rule 139 of the said Rules, the rules made earlier in<\/p>\n
force under the Act, i.e., the Explosives Rules, 1983 are repealed.<\/p>\n
Rule 139 reads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
            “139. Repeal and Savings.- (1) The Explosives<\/p>\n
      Rules, 1983 are hereby repealed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (2) Notwithstanding such repeal –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                   (a) all licences, permits or duplicates thereof<\/p>\n
      granted or renewed under the said rules and all fees<\/p>\n
      imposed or levied shall be deemed to have been granted,<\/p>\n
      renewed, imposed or levied, as the case may be, under<\/p>\n
      the corresponding provisions of these rules;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                   (b) all approvals given and all powers<\/p>\n
      conferred by or under any notification or rule shall, so far<\/p>\n
      as they are consistent with the Act and these rules, be<\/p>\n
      deemed to have been given or conferred by under this<\/p>\n
      Act or these rules”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It can be seen from sub-section (2) extracted above that all the<\/p>\n
licences   granted or renewed under the repealed rules are deemed<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                   – 5 –\n<\/p>\n
to be licences granted or renewed, as the case may be, under the<\/p>\n
corresponding provisions of the new rules.<\/p>\n
            8. Under Rule 7, it is declared that no person shall<\/p>\n
manufacture, import, export, transport, possess for sale or use an<\/p>\n
explosive except as authorised or licensed under the rules. Rule 7<\/p>\n
reads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
          “7. Control over manufacture, import, export, transport,<\/p>\n
    possession for sale or use of explosives.- No person shall<\/p>\n
    manufacture, import, export, transport, possess for sale or use an<\/p>\n
    explosive except as authorised or licensed under these rules”.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
It can be seen from the rules that having regard to the dangerous<\/p>\n
nature of the substance, every aspect of dealing in the explosives is<\/p>\n
required to be licenced, except as exempted under the Act and Rules.<\/p>\n
Chapter IV of the Rules deals with the manufacture of the explosives<\/p>\n
and the various aspects for regulation dealing with manufacture, while<\/p>\n
Chapter V deals with the import and export of explosives. Chapter VI<\/p>\n
deals with transportation of the explosives.<\/p>\n
            9. Chapter VII deals with the possession, sale and use of<\/p>\n
explosives.    Rule 71, which occurs under Chapter VII, declares as<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                      – 6 –\n<\/p>\n
follows:-\n<\/p>\n
             “71.   Possession in licensed premises.- (1) A person<\/p>\n
      holding licence for possession of explosives granted under these<\/p>\n
      rules shall store the explosives only in premises specified in the<\/p>\n
      licence.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/blockquote>\n
             (2)    The licensed magazine or store house shall be kept<\/p>\n
      securely closed or locked at all times except when goods are<\/p>\n
      being placed in or taken from it or when it must be kept open for<\/p>\n
      some other purpose in connection with the management of such<\/p>\n
      premises.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/blockquote>\n
             (3)    The keys of the licensed magazine shall, at all times<\/p>\n
      be kept secured in licensee’s own custody or of his authorised<\/p>\n
      agent and shall be produced for opening the magazine or store<\/p>\n
      house whenever so required by an inspecting officer.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
             (4)    The name and address of the person along with<\/p>\n
      passport size photograph with whom the keys will be kept shall<\/p>\n
      be furnished to the licensing authority and the Controller having<\/p>\n
      jurisdiction”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n
It   can     be seen from the above extract that a person holding a<\/p>\n
licence    for     possession of explosives, either for sale or use, is<\/p>\n
required to store only in the premises specified in the licence,<\/p>\n
known as “magazine” or         “store house”. Both the expressions are<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                               – 7 –\n<\/p>\n
defined under Rule 2, sub-rules (31) and (55)* respectively.<\/p>\n
               10. Chapter VIII of the Rules deals with the various aspects<\/p>\n
of the licensing for any one of the purposes mentioned earlier. Rule 99<\/p>\n
reads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
                “99. Licences and licensing authorities.- Licences and<\/p>\n
        certificates for specific purposes may be granted by the authorities<\/p>\n
        specified in Part I of Schedule IV”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It can be seen that under the Act and Rules, various licences and<\/p>\n
certificates are required to be obtained in connection with the various<\/p>\n
activities in the context of the explosives. Schedule IV appended to the<\/p>\n
rules contains a detailed list of the various purposes for which licences<\/p>\n
are granted and the appropriate licensing authority with reference to<\/p>\n
each one of the forms of licence.\n<\/p>\n
      ——————————————————————————<\/p>\n
         *R.2(31) “magazine” means a building or structure (other than<\/p>\n
     an explosives manufacturing building) intended for storage of<\/p>\n
     explosives,       specially     constructed        in    accordance         with the<\/p>\n
     specification provided under these rules or of a design and<\/p>\n
     approved by the Chief Controller.\n<\/p>\n
             R.2(55) “store house” means independent building other<\/p>\n
     than a magazine meant to possess fireworks not exceeding 5000<\/p>\n
     kilogrammes or safety fuse not exceeding 50000 meters, not for<\/p>\n
     sale but for transfer to own licensed shop”.<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                           – 8 –\n<\/p>\n
             11. The licence in issue, it is admitted on all hands, is a<\/p>\n
licence contemplated under Schedule IV, Part 1 appended to the<\/p>\n
said Rules. Entry 3(a) of the said Schedule reads as follows:<\/p>\n
     “Purpose for which granted            Licence Form           Licensing
\n     Authority\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     ——————————-      —————  ———————–
\n     Licence to possess for use,              LE-3         District Magistrate
\n     for agricultural purpose or
\n     in small quarry, explosives
\n     not exceeding 25 kilogrammes
\n     of Class 1 or 2 or 3 and 1500
\n     numbers of detonators; and
\n     1500 meters of detonating
\n     fuse or safety fuse at any one
\n     time in a magazine”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             12. Rule 101* stipulates that a person desiring to obtain<\/p>\n
a licence of any kind with respect of explosives, shall obtain prior<\/p>\n
approval from the authority empowered to grant such licence by<\/p>\n
submitting documents mentioned in Rule 113. Rule 113 contains a<\/p>\n
table indicating the various documents required to be submitted for<\/p>\n
seeking the approval contemplated under Rule 101 with reference<\/p>\n
     —————————————————————————–<\/p>\n
             *R.101(1)        A person desiring to obtain a licence for<\/p>\n
         manufacture,        possession      for   sale,    use,     transport    of<\/p>\n
         explosives, under these rules, shall obtain prior approval from<\/p>\n
         the authority empowered to grant such licence, by submitting<\/p>\n
         documents mentioned in rule 113.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 9 –\n<\/p>\n
to each of the purposes specified under the various entries of the<\/p>\n
table. Relevant in the context of the present case is Entry 9, which<\/p>\n
reads as follows:<\/p>\n
\n\nSl. Purpose of          Artitle   Licence Documents            Documents\nNo. Licence             number    Form    required             required for grant\n                        as per            for approval         of\n                        Part I of                              licence\n                        Schedule\n                        IV\n\n1   2                   3         4       5                    6<\/span>\n 9  Licence to possess 3(a)       LE-3    (i) Form AE-3        (i)  Form     AE-3\n    for      use,    for                  (for possession (and (for    possession\n    agricultural purpose                  use);                and use);\n    or in small quarry,\n    explosives       not\n    exceeding        25                   (ii) Plans of the    (ii) Plans of the\n    kilogrammes of Class                  proposed magazine    completed\n    1, 2 or 3; 1500                       and the site showing magazine and the\n    numbers detonators;                   approach       road; site       showing\n    1500     meters  of                   safety     distances,approach      road;\n    Detonating Fuse at                    licensed capacity;   safety    distances,\n    any one time in a                                          licensed capacity;\n    magazine.\n                                          (iii) Passport size\n                                          photographs of the   (iii)  Completion\n\n                                          occupier along with  certificate;\n\n                                          documentary\n                                          evidence          of (iv) Passport size\n                                          nomination        as photographs      of\n                                          occupier as per rule the occupier along\n                                          2;                   with documentary\n                                                               evidence         of\n\n                                          (iv) Scrutiny fee as nomination       as\n\n                                          per   Schedule   IV, occupier as per\n\n                                          Part 2.              rule 2;\n\n\n                                                               (v) Licence fee as\n                                                               per Schedule IV,\n                                                               Part 2.\n\nW.A.No.1458 of 2010\n                                      - 10 -\n\n<\/pre>\n
            13. Rule 102 stipulates that after obtaining an approval<\/p>\n
under Rule 101, a person desiring to obtain a licence shall also<\/p>\n
obtain a “No      Objection       Certificate”,    either from    the District<\/p>\n
Magistrate or Director General of Mines Safety, as the case may be,<\/p>\n
before    commencing         the     construction of the premises. The<\/p>\n
“premises” obviously in the context means the “magazine”.                Rule<\/p>\n
103, in so far as it is relevant, reads as follows:<\/p>\n
            “R.103(3) The          District   Magistrate on receipt of<\/p>\n
      application referred in sub-rule (1), shall make verification of<\/p>\n
      the     antecedents of the applicant, lawful possession of the<\/p>\n
      site, genuineness of the purpose, interest of public and any<\/p>\n
      other       verifications    or enquiries as may be specifically<\/p>\n
      required by the      licensing authority to be carried out, if any,<\/p>\n
      and on any other matter as deemed necessary.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (a)    For       verification of the interest of public, the<\/p>\n
      District   Magistrate shall forthwith cause a notice to be<\/p>\n
      published calling upon the public to submit objections, if any,<\/p>\n
      with reasons thereof, within a period of one month from the<\/p>\n
      date of publication of the notice and specifying the date, time<\/p>\n
      and place for      consideration of objections by him. Where the<\/p>\n
      site of the proposed premises lies within 1.5 kilometers of the<\/p>\n
      limits of the      jurisdiction of any town planning municipal<\/p>\n
      authority or port or air           port or satellite or space craft<\/p>\n
      launching    station   or   similar   establishments   of  national<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 11 –\n<\/p>\n
     importance, the       District Magistrate shall cause the notice to<\/p>\n
     be served to such authority or establishment. The day of<\/p>\n
     hearing for consideration of objections shall be fixed as early as<\/p>\n
     possible, after the expiration of the period of one month from the<\/p>\n
     date of publication of notice. On receipt of objection, the District<\/p>\n
     Magistrate shall call the person or persons raising objection and<\/p>\n
     also the applicant, giving not less than seven clear days before<\/p>\n
     the day fixed for hearing for consideration of the objection. On<\/p>\n
     the day fixed for the hearing or any day to which such hearing<\/p>\n
     may be adjourned from time to time, the District Magistrate shall<\/p>\n
     hear any objection relating to the purpose of no objection<\/p>\n
     certificate and shall make such enquiry, as he may deem<\/p>\n
     necessary to assess justification of such objection.<\/p>\n
            (b)    If the quantity of explosives does not exceed one<\/p>\n
     hundred kilograms or in case of ANFO or Liquid Oxygen<\/p>\n
     Explosives or SME or transport of explosives in a road van, the<\/p>\n
     notice for public for objection as stated in clause (a) shall not be<\/p>\n
     necessary”.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            14. Rule 108 permits the transfer of a licence obtained<\/p>\n
under the Rules and it also stipulates the various documents required<\/p>\n
to be submitted by an applicant seeking transfer of a licence<\/p>\n
(proposed transferee). Rule 108 reads as follows:-<\/p>\n
            “108. Transfer of licence.- (1) A licence granted under<\/p>\n
     these rules may be transferred by the authority empowered to<\/p>\n
     grant the licence.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                     – 12 –\n<\/p>\n
            (2) An applicant who desires to get the licence<\/p>\n
     transferred in his favour shall submit to the licensing authority –<\/p>\n
            (a)    an application in form appropriate for grant of the<\/p>\n
     licence;\n<\/p>\n
            (b)    specimen signature of the applicant or his<\/p>\n
     authorised person;\n<\/p>\n
            (c)    a letter from the existing licensee signed by the<\/p>\n
     authorised person requesting the transfer of licence in favour of<\/p>\n
     the applicant or a succession certificate from a competent court<\/p>\n
     in case of death of a licensee being an individual;<\/p>\n
            (d)    original licence issued to the existing licensee;<\/p>\n
            (e)    copies of supporting documents regarding transfer<\/p>\n
     of rights of the premises in favour of the applicant;<\/p>\n
            (f)    requisite scrutiny fee and transfer fee;<\/p>\n
            (g)    copies of all approved drawings in the name of the<\/p>\n
     applicant;\n<\/p>\n
            (h)    status    of  the   applicant   whether     individual,<\/p>\n
     proprietary firm, partnership firm, company, association or<\/p>\n
     society or otherwise – documentary evidence along with names,<\/p>\n
     addresses of the proprietor or partners or directors or members<\/p>\n
     as the case may be, and photographs of the occupier, to be<\/p>\n
     submitted;\n<\/p>\n
            (i)    a  no     objection  certificate  from    the  District<\/p>\n
     Magistrate for transfer of the licence in favour of the applicant:<\/p>\n
            Provided that no objection certificate shall not be<\/p>\n
     necessary if the applicant holds a licence for which a no<\/p>\n
     objection certificate has already been granted”.<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                  – 13 –\n<\/p>\n
It can be seen that under sub-rule (2) clause (i), in the case of a<\/p>\n
transfer of a licence also a ‘no objection certificate’ from the District<\/p>\n
Magistrate is required to be obtained. Though the rule is not very<\/p>\n
categoric about the nature of the District Magistrate’s responsibility in<\/p>\n
granting such a no objection certificate, we are of the opinion that the<\/p>\n
scope of the authority and the nature of the legal obligation cast on the<\/p>\n
District Magistrate cannot be in any way different than the authority<\/p>\n
and scope of the District Magistrate while granting a no objection<\/p>\n
certificate under Rule 103, the relevant portion of which is already<\/p>\n
extracted earlier. One of the relevant considerations either for granting<\/p>\n
or declining to grant a no objection certificate is the lawful possession<\/p>\n
of the site where the explosives are proposed to be used.<\/p>\n
            15. In the   instant case when an enquiry was conducted<\/p>\n
on the application of the appellant seeking transfer of the licence<\/p>\n
originally issued in favour of Mr.Paulson, it appears that the original<\/p>\n
licensee (Paulson) raised certain     objections regarding the claim of<\/p>\n
the appellant. In view of such objection and also the report of the<\/p>\n
Tahsildar, Mukundapuram dated 29.3.2010, the first respondent<\/p>\n
declined to transfer the        explosives licence as prayed for and<\/p>\n
advised the appellant to make a fresh          application in accordance<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 14 –\n<\/p>\n
with law if he is still desirous of securing an explosive licence for the<\/p>\n
purpose of use of explosives for quarrying operations in the property<\/p>\n
referred to above.\n<\/p>\n
            16. Aggrieved by the said direction, the appellant herein<\/p>\n
filed the writ petition which was dismissed in limine. Hence this appeal.<\/p>\n
            17. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the<\/p>\n
first respondent could not have declined a no objection certificate for<\/p>\n
transfer of licence as much as transfer is permissible under the<\/p>\n
Explosives Act and the rules made thereunder.<\/p>\n
            18. We regret our inability to accept the submission of the<\/p>\n
learned counsel. As already noticed, under sub-rule (3) of Rule 103,<\/p>\n
before granting a no objection certificate, the District Magistrate is<\/p>\n
obliged (1) to conduct verification of the antecedents of the applicant,<\/p>\n
(2) lawful possession of the site in which the explosives are proposed<\/p>\n
to be used pursuant to the licence, (3) genuineness of the purpose of<\/p>\n
use, (4) interest of the public and (5) any other matter which may<\/p>\n
appear to be appropriate to the authority having regard to the facts<\/p>\n
and circumstances of the case.\n<\/p>\n
            19. It appears from the order that the original licensee<\/p>\n
objected to the application of the appellant seeking transfer of the<\/p>\n
W.A.No.1458 of 2010\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 15 –\n<\/p>\n
licence. Under what circumstances the original licensee who according<\/p>\n
to the appellant is alleged to have agreed to transfer the licence<\/p>\n
subsequently turned round and objected is not the concern of the first<\/p>\n
respondent. The first respondent, in our view, was perfectly justified<\/p>\n
and is within the limits of the jurisdiction in declining to grant no<\/p>\n
objection certificate in view of the dispute between the alleged<\/p>\n
transferor and the appellant herein. The existence of a dispute<\/p>\n
between the alleged transferor and transferee regarding the transfer is<\/p>\n
certainly a ground which is required to be kept in mind before granting<\/p>\n
or refusing the no objection certificate for the transfer of the licence.<\/p>\n
            In such circumstances, we do not see any merit in the writ<\/p>\n
appeal and it is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage.<\/p>\n
                                                 J.Chelameswar,
\n                                                   Chief Justice.\n<\/p>\n
                                          P.R. Ramachandra Menon,
\n                                                     Judge.\n<\/p>\n
vns\/vku.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WA.No. 1458 of 2010() 1. C.A.RAFI, S\/O. ANTHONI, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, … Respondent 2. THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF 3. THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, For Petitioner :SRI.DINESH MATHEW […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-229218","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nC.A.Rafi vs The Additional District ... on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District ... on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-23T14:22:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-23T14:22:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2878,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\",\"name\":\"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District ... on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-23T14:22:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District ... on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District ... on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-23T14:22:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-23T14:22:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010"},"wordCount":2878,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010","name":"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District ... on 9 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-23T14:22:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-a-rafi-vs-the-additional-district-on-9-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C.A.Rafi vs The Additional District … on 9 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229218","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=229218"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229218\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=229218"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=229218"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=229218"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}