Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI WEDNESDAY, THE29H DAY OF JANUARY20149TH MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 916 of 2011 (L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- A.K.SANTHA, (LICENSEE) PROPRIETOR, HOTEL SAYANA, MOOVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENTS: ----------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT (TAXES) DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, EXCISE DEPARTMENT, MOOVATTUPUZHA RANGE, MOOVATTUPUZHA. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P. FAZIL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2901-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 916 of 2011 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE IN RESPECT OF ABKARI YEAR2008 2009 EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE GRANTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND DATED310.1981 EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE2D PETITIONER IN IA2282012 IN OS432012 DT.15-3-2012. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
DT.26-3-2012 IN IA2282012 IN OS422012 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT ALONG WITH SURVEY PLAN FILED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN OS432012 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR, DT.1-7-2013. EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE IA9512013 IN OS432012 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS DT.29-7-2013. EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN IA9512013 IN OS432012 DT.28-8-2013. EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
DT.4-10-2013 IN IA9512013 IN OS432012 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR. EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED142.2009. EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED163.2009. EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED NIL ISSUED BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, KOTHAMANGALAM. EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED163.2009 ISSUED BY THE3D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED313.2009 IN WP(C) NO.10047/09 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE OBJECTION DATED94.09 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED156.2009 PASSED BY THE3D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN DATED156.2009. EXHIBIT P17: TRUE COPY OF THE PRESENT BUILDING PLAN. EXHIBIT P18: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED263.10 ISSUED BY THE5H RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P19: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED83.2010 TO THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER. WP(C).No. 916 of 2011 (L) EXHIBIT P20: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED1810.2010 ISSUED BY THE3D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P21: TRUE COPY OF THE ENTRY DATED1812.2010. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL ----------------------- TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE SCL. A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the licencee of a Hotel by name, Sayana at Moovattupuzha bearing Licence No.FL-3-74/2008-09. The 3rd respondent, by Ext.P15 order, regulated certain unauthorized alterations in the building subject to the payment of a sum of 25,000/- as fine. The petitioner remitted the same in terms of Ext.P16 chalan. Thereafter, she submitted Ext.P17 plan for approval of the 3rd respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent has passed Ext.P20 to the effect that all the side doors other than the main door for entering to the Bar room should be closed. This, according to the petitioner, will cause inconvenience and the same would result in one entry to the Hotel as well as Bar.
2. When the matter came up for hearing, the W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2011 ..2.. learned Senior Government Pleader made available a copy of Order No.XC6.9003/07 dated 31.10.2011, by which the work completed as per plan of the licenced premises of the petitioner's hotel was approved. In the light of the subsequent development, it appears that there is no surviving cause of action and; therefore, this writ petition is closed. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE bka/-