Back
2009 Supreme(Ker) 196
High Court Of Kerala
ANTONY DOMINIC
T.A.Jose & Company - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
WP(C).No.30292 of 2007 (F)
Decided On : 03/03/2009
For the Petitioner:V.V. Asokan, Advocate. For the Respondents:K. Ramakumar (Sr.), Advocate.
Headnote:
Administrative Law - Constitution of India, Article,226 - Petitioner as the Authorized Wholesale Distributor at Mundoor and Kuttanelloor in Trissur District. However, this order was not implemented and seeking its implementation, petitioner filed O.P.No.2072/97 before this Court. By this time, Government policy had changed and as a result of which, the first respondent entrusted AWD-1 at Mundoor to a Co-operative Society and AWD No.2 at Kuttanelloor, to the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation. This arrangement, appears to have continued till 2004 when the Civil Supplies Corporation abandoned the distributorship and AWD entrusted to the Co-operative Society was suspended - According to her, Ext.P3 appointment was only a temporary arrangement and therefore the Government is always competent to entrust the AWD to anybody it deems appropriate. She also canvassed for the position that after Ext.P3, petitioner has not been issued an order of appointment as contemplated in the Rationing Order - Held, Exts.P4 and P14 order to be invalid for not complying with the 3rd proviso to Cl.51(11) of the Rationing Order, I do not think it necessary or proper for this Court to enter into a finding on the competence of the complainant at whose instance, Ext.P4 order was rendered or the contention that proceedings initiated were beyond the time specified in Cl.51(11) or that in spite of delay the same was not condoned by the 2nd respondent and all other contentions raised by the parties. These are issues which necessarily will have to be raised by the petitioner, before the 2nd respondent, if and when fresh proceedings are initiated and are left open - Petition is disposed.
The main prayer in this writ petition is to quash Exts.P4, P7, P8 and P14 orders.
2. Facts of the case are that, Ext.P1 is an order passed by the 3rd respondent, appointing the petitioner as the Authorized Wholesale Distributor at Mundoor and Kuttanelloor in Trissur District. However, this order was not implemented and seeking its implementation, petitioner filed O.P.No.2072/97 before this court. By this time, Government policy had changed and as a result of which, the first respondent entrusted AWD-1 at Mundoor to a Co-operative Society and AWD No.2 at Kuttanelloor, to the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation. This arrangement, appears to have continued till 2004 when the Civil Supplies Corporation abandoned the distributorship and AWD entrusted to the Co-operative Society was suspended.
3. At this stage, the petitioner herein filed WP(c). No.14615/04, again claiming implementation of Ext.P1, appointing him as AWD at Mundoor and Kuttnelloor. In that writ petition a learned Single Judge of this court passed Annexure-A2 order dated 18.5.2004, directing that if the Government is appointing anybody other than the Civil Supplies Corporation, the same shall be done only in accordance with law after issuing notification. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed W.A. No.1308/04, in which a Division Bench of this court passed Ext.P2 order directing that the AWDs at Mundoor and Kuttanellor shall not be entrusted to anybody other than the appellant (the petitioner herein), if the shops have not already been entrusted to any other person.
4. Thereafter it would appear that the matter was discussed at various levels, as is seen from Exts.P18 to P22. Ext.P18 is the letter issued by the District Supply officer (D.S.O), to the Secretary to Government, Ext.P19 is he letter issued by the DSO to Deputy Secretary of the first respondent, Ext.P20 is the letter issued by the Director of Civil Supplies to Secretary to Government, Ext.P21 is yet another letter issued by the D.S.O to the Commissioner of Civil Supplies. In all these communications, reference is made to Ext.P2 order passed by the Division Bench of this court and directions were sought for the arrangement to be made in the context of Ext.P2 order. Ext.P22 is the note files of the first respondent, in which it is seen that after elaborate consideration of the matter at various levels, the Minister for Food and Civil Supplies, vide his order dated 10.2005 ordered to issue directions to the District Collector, Trissur to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in the light of Ext.P2 order. In pursuance to Ext.P22 referred to above, Annexure-A4 order was issued by the first respondent directing the District Collector, Trissur to take steps for starting the AWD at Mundoor and Kuttanelloor and to entrust its running to the petitioner in the light of Ext.P2 order.
5. In pursuance to Annexure-A4 referred to above, petitioner states that he was called upon to submit an application for appointment as AWD and accordingly Annexure-A5 application was submitted by him to the District Collector on 10.2005. It is stated that finally the District Collector issued Ext.P3 order dated 110.2005 appointing the petitioner as AWD at Mundoor and Kuttanellor exercising his powers under Clause 51(1) of the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966. Although the date of service of Ext.P3 order is not seen disclosed in the pleadings, petitioner submits that in implementation of Ext.P3 he lifted the stock on 110.2005 and commenced business from that date itself.
6. While the petitioner was thus continuing as the AWD at Mundoor and Kuttanellor, it is stated that complaint dated 1.2006, was received from one Sri. P.B. Mohanan, Secretary, Kerala State Ration Consumers Association, Vittyla, Ernakulam and on its receipt, the Commissioner of Civil Supplies, by order dated 28.1.2006 called for the files regarding the appointment of the petitioner and it is so stated in Annexure-A9. Accordingly, under the co
