JAYAKUMAR Vs. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader.

(3.) It is contended that the petitioner is a licencee of toddy shops of Group No.1 of Kayamkulam Excise Range. He was issued with licence on resale from 8.9.2016 and the period was extended. It is stated that on the basis of some anonymous petitions, Exhibit P1 order was passed suspending the licence on the ground that one Manoj, who is a relative of the petitioner and an accused in a spirit case is conducting the shop in the name of the petitioner as his benami. The petitioner filed W.P.(C).No.3197/92017 challenging the said order and Exhibit P3 judgment was rendered directing the conduct of a full-fledged enquiry as to the allegation of benami conduct of the shop, with notice to the petitioner. W.A.No.2285/2017 filed by the petitioner against the said judgment was dismissed on 4.12.2017. But the petitioner was permitted to continue the conduct of the shops. Thereafter, notices were issued by the 4th respondent, but no enquiry as directed in Exhibit P3 judgment was held. However, Exhibit P6 order was passed cancelling all the licences of all toddy shops in Group No.1 on the ground that the allegation of benami conduct of the shop by Manoj stands substantiated.