P.C. BOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS , along with the fifth respondent, have been allotted the privilege of conducting toddy shop Nos.8 to 12 in Group No.II of Ettumanoor Excise Range for the period from 01-08-2012 to 31-03-2013. They had been conducting the said toddy shops from 01-04-2007 to 31-07-2012. Therefore, the toddy shops were allotted to them on preferential basis. The allotments were confirmed as per Ext.P1. Pursuant to the allotment of the shops, permanent agreements have to be executed by the petitioners and the fifth respondent with the second respondent. However, the fifth respondent did not execute the permanent agreement for the reason that he was in Ireland. Therefore, the petitioners sought extension of time for executing the permanent agreement. The petitioners were permitted to run the toddy shops initially on their executing temporary agreements, but, they were directed to close down the shops, when the permanent agreements were not executed. Thereupon, they approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.20561/2012. They contended that they would undertake the responsibility for all the financial liabilities that may arise from the conduct of the toddy shops in question. They also assured that they would undertake the entire responsibility including criminal liability, if any, that may arise from the conduct of the shops by them, during the financial year. They further undertook to execute permanent agreements as stipulated by the Rules. After considering the contentions of the petitioners, the second respondent was directed by this Court to consider the matter and to take a decision thereon within a period of two weeks from the date of the said order. The said interim order is Ext.P4. The petitioners were also permitted to conduct the toddy shops pending the decision of the second respondent.

(2.) PURSUANT to Ext.P4, the matter was considered by the second respondent and, by Ext.P5 proceedings, the petitioners were granted two months' time to execute the permanent agreement. It has been provided in Ext.P5 that the petitioners are solely responsible for all the responsibilities/liabilities for the conduct of the shops during the said period. Apart from the above, it has also been stipulated in Ext.P5 that, if no permanent agreement is executed within the period of two months stipulated by Ext.P5, the allotment of the shops would be cancelled without any further notice. Ext.P5 is dated 10-09-2012. Therefore, the period of two months granted by Ext.P5 would expire only on 10-11-2012.

(3.) ACCORDING to the senior counsel Sri.C.C.Thomas, who appears for the petitioners, Ext.P11 has been issued without any notice to the petitioners and without hearing them. It is pointed out that they have paid the entire amount that is due to the Government and that Exts.P9 and P10 toddy transport permits have been issued to them, which are valid up to 31-03-2013. They have also executed the necessary permanent agreements. Therefore, after having received the entire amount payable by the petitioners, it is inequitable to have passed Ext.P11, relying only on the complaint made by the fifth respondent.