LAWS(MAD)-2006-11-198

STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. S SOLAIMALAI NADAR

Decided On November 27, 2006
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Appellant
V/S
S. SOLAIMALAI NADAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ appeal is directed against the order dated 11.12.1997 made in W.P.No.18292 of 1993, in and by which, the learned single Judge, after directing the respondents therein to allow 600 family cards to each of the petitioner instead of 500 cards as fixed by the authority, has partly allowed the writ petition.

(2.) HEARD the learned Special Government Pleader for appellants as well as the learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) APART from the above factual details, it is to be noted that after considering various aspects and in order to provide employment to several persons, the Government had decided to attach not exceeding 500 family cards to each retail registration certificate holder. The said decision cannot be faulted with. We are of the view that the present system of attaching 500 cards to retail registration certificate holders is quite reasonable and acceptable. We have already referred to the information furnished in the counter affidavit that the income derived from the sale of kerosene to 500 family cards is sufficient for the Retail Registration Certificate holder to meet out their livelihood. Even otherwise, it is not for this Court to step into the shoes of the Executive and alter the number of cards without adequate materials. As rightly pointed out by the learned Special Government Pleader, even if there is a case for increase in number of cards, it is for the concerned authority to decide, taking note of various aspects including the number of beneficiaries etc. The Judiciary cannot step in to the shoes of the Executive to play their role. Though the learned single Judge has enhanced the number of cards from 500 to 600, why it not be 800 or 900. We are satisfied that there is no material for arriving such conclusion. In these circumstances, the order of the learned single Judge dated 11.12.1997 made in W.P.No.18292 of 1993 is set aside. The writ appeal is allowed. No costs.