PAMESH KUMAR Vs. EXCISE COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was the licensee of Toddy Shop No. 57 under Group No. XV of Thrithala Excise Range in Palakkad District for the year 2002-2003, 2003-2004 and 2005-2006. While so, Crime No. 36 of 2005 of Mankara Police Station was registered against the petitioner under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act and his license was cancelled. Subsequently, as per Ext. P1 judgment dated 22/09/2010 in SC No. 168 of 2010 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Ad-hoc No. I, Palakkad arising from the aforesaid crime, the petitioner was acquitted. In such circumstances, he submitted Ext. P3 application before the fourth respondent claiming preference under Rule 5(1)(a) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 (for short the 'Rules'). That application was rejected as per Ext. P5 relying on GO (P) No. 33/2014/TD dated 22/02/2014 published in SRO No. 151/2014. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said GO is absolutely inapplicable in the case of the petitioner and at any rate, the said GO should not have been relied on for rejecting the claim of the petitioner for preference in terms of Rule 5(1)(a) of the Rules. The contention of the petitioner is that as per the said GO dated 22/02/2014, no amendment was brought to the second limb of Rule 5(1)(a) of the Rules. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In the context of the aforesaid contention of the petitioner it is only appropriate to refer to Rule 5(1)(a) of the Rules and the same reads thus: