Subash Soman Vs. the President, Vilakudy Grama Panchayath - Court Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE12H DAY OF NOVEMBER201321ST KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 27691 of 2013 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------------- SUBASH SOMAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, ROHINI GLOBAL MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD, KUNNIKODE, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM. BY SRI.N.DHARMADAN,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SMT.D.P.RENU RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE PRESIDENT, VILAKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNNIKODE P.O., KOLLAM-691 508.

2. VICE PRESIDENT, VILAKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNNIKODE P.O., KOLLAM-691 508 3. VILAKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYAT (SPECIAL GRADE), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VILAKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNNIKODE P.O., KOLLAM-691 508 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 001 R4 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K.SHERIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1211-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 27691 of 2013 (J) ------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED2810/2013 ISSUED BY THE3D RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED NIL FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE CLASSIFICATION CERTIFICATE FOR THE PERIOD FROM3112/2012 TO3012/2017 ISSUED BY TOURISM DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT

IN WPC NO.23695/2013 DATED279/2013 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED2110/2013 BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED511/2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED810/2013 BY THE PANCHAYAT EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF PLAN SHOWING THE LOCATION. EXHIBIT P9. TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED711/2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

--------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.27691 of 2013-J ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2013

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has constructed a hotel having four star facilities within the third respondent Panchayat. Thereafter, though he had submitted an application for the issue of a No Objection Certificate for the purpose of preferring an application for the issue of an FL-3 licence under the Kerala Abkari Act and the Rules thereunder, his application was rejected by the Panchayat as per Exhibit P1. The petitioner has therefore submitted an application Exhibit P6, which is for the issue of a No Objection Certificate for submitting an application for an FL-11 licence. However, no orders have been passed thereon. The petitioner has thereafter submitted Exhibit P9 application for FL-11 licence to the 4th respondent, on which also, no orders have been passed.

2. According to the learned Senior Counsel Sri.N.Dharmadan who appears for the petitioner, the Panchayat has already issued an FL-1 licence to the Kerala -:2:- W.P.(C) No.27691 of 2013-J State Beverages Corporation as evident from the information received under the Right to Information Act, 2005, which is Exhibit P7. It is therefore contended that there is absolutely no justification for discriminating the petitioner in the matter of issuing a No Objection Certificate. If the object of the Panchayat were to convert the same into a liquor free Panchayat, it is pointed out that, there was no reason to grant permission to the Beverages Corporation to conduct an FL-1 outlet. The learned Senior Counsel therefore seeks the issue of appropriate directions for the consideration of Exhibits P6 and P9.

3. The learned Government Pleader submits on behalf of the 4th respondent that an application for FL-11 licence has to be accompanied by a No Objection Certificate issued by the third respondent. Therefore, it is necessary that the petitioner obtains a No Objection Certificate first, before Exhibit P9 could be considered. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the petitioner has invested about Rupees ten crores to construct his hotel and to install all facilities to conduct a star hotel. It is pointed out that, four star hotels are not frequented by the local public and therefore xcv the -:3:- W.P.(C) No.27691 of 2013-J petitioner's hotel would not result in a proliferation of the sale of liqour as apprehended by the Panchayt authorities. On the contrary, the continued operation of an FL-I shop would make liquor easily available to the local public.

4. Since Exhibit P6 is pending before the Panchayat, I am satisfied that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the same to be considered. If the petitioner is granted a No Objection Certificate, he would be at liberty to pursue Exhibit P9. This writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the third respondent to consider Exhibit P6 application submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 4th respondent shall consider Exhibit P9 after the petitioner produces a No Objection Certificate from the third respondent. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE kkj