RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What is in issue in these O. Ps. is the question of appointment of a suitable person as stamp vendor attached to the Munsiff's Court, Ponnani, the incumbent having died on 15-9-1985. The petitioners and the common fourth respondent in the two OPs. and others submitted applications seeking such appointment. As per order dated 27-6-1986, the statutory authority, (the Tahasildar, Ponnani) appointed the fourth respondent as the stamp vendor. His appointment is challenged in both these O. Ps. Fourth respondent appeared through counsel in O. P. 4576/1986 and has filed a counter affidavit. O. P. 5145/1986 has come up for admission and a copy of the same has been served on the learned Liaison Officer and the counsel for the fourth respondent.

(2.) S.69 of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 confers on the Government power to make rules to cany out generally the purposes of the Act. Sub-s.2(a) states that such rules may be made for regulating the supply and the sale of stamps and stamped papers. State Government have accordingly made the Kerala Stamp Rules, 1960 (for short 'the Rules'). R.35 of the Rules states, inter alia, that the sale of stamps shall be made by licensed stamp vendors appointed by the Tahsildar. Tahsildar is the authority competent to grant leave to licensed stamp vendors without limit of time. He is also competent to fill up temporary vacancies caused by the grant of such leave and to grant licence for the sale of stamps to substitutes appointed by him in such cases. An appeal lies to the Revenue Divisional Officer against any order passed by the Tahsildar under that rule. Power of revision, either suo motu or on application, vests with the District Collector. R.37 states that every licence granted to licensed stamp vendors shall be signed by the Tahasildar and be revoked by him.

(3.) As per circular dated 4-7-1984 Government instructed all Revenue Divisional Officers not to make appointment of new stamp vendors except the legal heirs of deceased vendors pending issue of amendments to the existing rules, pointing out that there were proposals under consideration to amend R.35 and 37. On 21-1-1984 the Government issued another circular stating that the intention of the Government is that the appointing authority shall obtain the clearance from the Government before new appointments are made. Accordingly, in supersession of the instructions issued in the circular dated 4-7-1984, Government directed that all Tahsildars, Revenue Divisional Officers and District Collectors shall obtain clearance from the Government before appointments are made except in the case of legal heirs of deceased vendors. Learned Liaison Officer submitted that steps are being taken to amend the relevant rules. However, admittedly, rules have not been amended.