IMPORTANT POINT
A change in the name of the office bearers of a club in the licence does not amount to change the identity of the licensee, and therefore the fees stipulated by the provisions of Rule 19 (iv) of the Foreign Liquor Rules cannot be levied when the club requests a change in the name of the office bearers in the licence issued to the Club.

JUDGMENT :

Petitioner is a Club which was constituted as a Society under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. According to the petitioner it is started functioning in the year 1897. The petitioner has approached this court challenging Ext.P6 which is an order issued by the Deputy Excise Commissioner (Abkari) refusing to change/substitute name of the Secretary of the Club in the licence issued to the petitioner under Rule 13 (4A) of the Foreign Liquor Rules 1974. (Licence in Form FL-4A) The Deputy Excise Commissioner through Ext.P6 demanded payment of Rs.2,00,000/-in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 19 (iv) of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1974, for the same.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner by a Division Bench decision of this court in State of Kerala and others v. Cochin Gymkhana Club; 2016 (3) KLT 55, wherein it was held that when office bearers of a Club which is registered as a society changes from time to time it cannot be said that there is a change in the identity of the licencee attracting the demand for fee under Rule 19 (iv) of the Foreign Liquor Rules. It is submitted that Rules have also been amended with effect from 01-04-2020 and a proviso has been added to Rule 19 (iv) of the Foreign Liquor Rules as follows;

“Provided further that no fee shall be levied for the change of name of licensee in respect of licence in Form FL 4A, due to the change in the office bearers of the club.”

3. The learned Government Pleader submits that Ext.P6 communication was issued demanding payment of Rs.2,00,000/-in terms of the provisions contained in the Foreign Liquor Rules as it then stood. It is submitted that that amendment to the Foreign Liquor Rules pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner came into force with effect from 11-04-2020 and therefore the demand in Ext.P6 cannot be disputed. However, it is not seriously disputed that an identical issue was considered by this court in Cochin Gymkhana Club (supra).

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner by virtue of the decision of this court in Cochin Gymkhana Club (supra). In Paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of the judgment in Cochin Gymkhana Club (supra) this court held as follows;

“7. A perusal of the above provision shows that, licenses are permitted to be issued to “existing Clubs” on payment of an annual rental of Rs.15,00,000/-(Rupees Fifteen lakhs only). Provided they satisfy the conditions stipulated by the Rule. A perusal of the conditions show that, all the conditions stipulated relate to the Club. In other words, the conditions stipulate that the Club should have completed 10 years of existence, it should be a registered society, the membership should not be less than 100 and so on. Any condition touching upon the eligibility of its functionaries is conspicuously absent in the provision. Therefore, the power of the Excise Commissioner to issue a license under rule 13(4A) is available only in respect of a Club that satisfies the conditions stipulated by the said Rule. Of course as per the form of license appended to the Rules, the license is in fact issued to a responsible functionary of the Club. The said procedure is adopted only for the purpose of ensuring that a competent person is made responsible for discharging the duties that are cast on a licensee by the Abkari Act and the Rules thereunder. The Club which is an organization and an unnatural person is necessary to be represented by a real, natural person so as to be available for being fastened with the liability that may arise under the Act and the Rules. However, the fact remains that the licensee which could only be the Club, would continue to remain the same, though its functionaries may change from time to time. R