KERALA STATE BEVERAGES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions is the same, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed by this common judgment. WP(C) No.2661 of 2017 is preferred by the Kerala State Beverages (M&M) Corporation (hereinafter referred to as KSBC), aggrieved by Ext.P5 stop memo, that is issued to them by the respondent Panchayath, restraining them from carrying on operations of storage and sale of Alcoholic Beverages from premises which they have taken on rent, within the territorial limits of the Panchayat. WP(C) Nos.4161 and 5097 of 2017 are preferred by persons residing in the neighbourhood of the premises, taken on rent by the Kerala State Beverages Corporation for the purposes of storage and vending of Alcoholic Beverages. For the sake of convenience, the reference to facts and exhibits is from WP(C) No.2661 of 2017. 2. The KSBC had, pursuant to the directions issued by the Supreme Court, that all the FL-1 shops which are located near the State/National Highways, had to be relocated to alternate premises, identified and taken on lease a building bearing No.IV/224 A in Kuruvilangad, owned by one Venugopal, for the purposes of shifting their FL-1 shop to the said premises. Immediately on the petitioner identifying the said premises within the territorial limits of the respondent Panchayat, the KSBC also submitted an application for the issuance of necessary D and O license, that would enable them to carry on the vending operations from the said premises. It would appear that the said application was not considered by the respondent Panchayat for the reason that the application was incomplete and further, it was noticed by the respondent Panchayat that the premises from which the KSBC proposed to carry on its vending operations was one, that was categorised as residential and not commercial. It is stated that, on the said defect being pointed out, KSBC caused a fresh application to be submitted by the owner of the building for granting permission to change the category of the building from residential to commercial. The said application, which is pending consideration before the respondent Panchayat has been produced as Ext.R2(j) by the 2nd respondent Panchayat alongwith its counter affidavit. The said counter affidavit also indicates that, subsequent to the receipt of Ext.R2(j) application from the owner of the building, the Panchayat made enquiries with the said owner as regards the reasons which prompted the owner of the building to seek a category change. It is pointed out that the owner of the building has since indicated that the reason for seeking category change was for enabling the KSBC to conduct an FL-1 shop from the said premises. The respondent Panchayat is now considering the application submitted by the owner of the building for category change, and the learned counsel for the respondent Panchayath submits that a decision on the said application will be taken shortly. Taking note of the said submission of the learned counsel for the Panchayat, I am of the view that these writ petitions can be disposed with the following directions: