RAMACHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 3rd respondent applied to the second respondent Collector of Trichur District for the issue of permit for the establishment of a new rice mill in Sy. No. 284/2 of Puzhakkal Village, Adatt Panchayat, Trichur District, as required under S.5(1) of the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958 (the Act for short). The power to issue the permit has been conferred on the Collector by notification issued by the first respondent Government in exercise of the powers conferred under S.4 of the Act. S.5(4) of the Act requires the authority competent to issue the permit to cause a full and complete investigation to be made in respect of the application and the authority shall also have due regard to the various conditions prescribed in clauses (a) to (f) before granting any permit. The 3rd respondent's application was accordingly caused to be enquired into by the Taluk Supply Officer, Trichur, inter alia that the average yield of paddy in Puzhakkal Village was only 2,50,000 paras and that there were eight rice mills already existing and functioning in the Village. He also reported that there was a rice mill within one furlong of the mill proposed by the 3rd respondent. On the basis of this investigation by the Taluk Supply Officer and the report furnished by him, the second respondent passed an order on 31-1-87 rejecting the petitioner's application for licence. A true copy of that order is produced by the 3rd respondent as Ext. R3(a).

(2.) The facts as reported by the Taluk Supply Officer do not appear to have been correct and therefore on receipt of Ext. R3(a) the 3rd respondent filed an application before the second respondent himself setting forth the facts and requesting the District Collector to conduct a fresh enquiry into the matter and grant the permit prayed for. He also enclosed the order of the District Industries Centre, Trichur, registering his unit as a small scale industrial unit as also the no objection certificate issued by the Adatt Panchayat. This petition was styled as an appeal petition and purported to be filed against the order of the District Supply Officer. Trichur dated 31-1-1987. The 3rd respondent has in bis counter affidavit stated that this was a mistake committed by him and that really what he bad sought was a re-consideration of the matter by the Collector himself on the basis of the true facts placed by him in the appeal petition Ext. R3(b).

(3.) On receipt of this petition the Collector made personal enquiries, conducted a local inspection and also obtained a report from the Joint Director of Agriculture, Trichur, regarding the availability of paddy. The latter reported that having regard to the average yield in the area, the approximate production of paddy in the Puzhakkal Village will be about 700 MT and that since there was only one rice mill in the area there was ample scope for establishment of a new rice mill. The Collector also, on the basis of his local inspection, noted that the nearest rice mill was not within the vicinity as reported by the Taluk Supply Officer, but about 400 meters away and that the other rice mills in the area were all only within a radius of 2 KMs. The Collector also noted that the petitioner's unit bad been registered as a small scale industrial unit with the District Industries Centre under the self employment scheme and that it was the Government's policy to help such applicants. The Collector noted that there had been some error in passing the previous order and that the 3rd respondent should not be penalised for the error. He, therefore, passed fresh orders in the matter Ext. R3(c) granting permission to the 3rd respondent to establish a rice mill.