Suja Thomas vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 1830 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

     MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 28TH POUSHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.1270 OF 2021(G)


PETITIONERS:

      1        SUJA THOMAS
               AGED 50 YEARS
               W/O.THOMAS CHACKO, PURATHEL, ARATTUPPUZHA, ARANMULA,
               KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689
               123.

      2        KUNJAMMA CHACKO,
               AGED 88 YEARS
               W/O.P.V.CHACKO, PURATHEL, ARATTUPPUZHA, ARANMULA,
               KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689
               123.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.JACOB P.ALEX
               SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX
               SHRI.MANU SANKAR P.

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT SECRETARY FOR CIVIL
               SUPPLIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
               PIN-695 001.

      2        DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
               CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695
               033.

      3        DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER,
               DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICE, CIVIL STATION,
               PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645.

      4        TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, KOZHENCHERRY,
               TALUK SUPPLY OFFICE, KOZHENCHERRY, PIN-689 645.


               SMT.VINITHA.B, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.1270 OF 2021(G)

                                  2



                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 18th day of January 2021

The 2nd petitioner, who is the licensee

running the Authorised Retail Dealer of the

Ration Depot - ARD No.1 of the Kozhencherry Taluk

of Aranmula Grama Panchayath is aged 88 years and

therefore, she has nominated the 1st petitioner

who is her daughter-in-law for appointment as ARD

No.1 - the above mentioned Ration Depot. It is

stated that along with Ext.P1 application for

appointment, Ext.P2 letter of consent and Ext.P3

Relationship Certificate are also submitted. The

petitioners points out that under Clause 45(2) of

the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966, an authorised

retail distributor is eligible to nominate a

member of his/her family for appointment as ARD

in the event of his being incapable of running

the ration business, owing to old age or illness

or in the event of his death. The 1St petitioner

who is the daughter-in-law of the 2nd petitioner WP(C).No.1270 OF 2021(G)

is a member of her family. Therefore, she is

eligible for appointment as a licensee for

running the ARD.

2. The petitioners pointed out that in the

very same district the 3rd respondent has issued

Exts.P5 and P6. The petitioners points out that

Exts.P5 and P6 orders are issued by the 3rd

respondent granting appointment to family members

who are daughter-in -law/sun-in-law. Similarly,

it is pointed out that Ext.P4 information

received under the right to information Act would

also show that similar appointments are made in 7

ARDs. Apart from that, in Ext.P7 judgment, this

Court had, after taking note of the objections

raised by the learned Government Pleader,

directed the competent authority to consider the

applications for transfer of licensee, taking

note of the orders passed in similar cases.

3. The petitioners points out that, even

though the application, Ext.P1, was submitted, no

action is taken on Ext.P1 application. WP(C).No.1270 OF 2021(G)

Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

In view of the circumstances stated by the

petitioner and the legal provisions, there shall

be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider

the application of the petitioner in the light of

the directions already issued by this Court and

the orders passed by the 3rd respondent himself in

similar cases and also taking note of the fact

that the 1st petitioner is a family member of the

2nd petitioner. Orders shall be passed within a

period of one month from the date of receipt of a

copy of the judgment.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA JUDGE DM WP(C).No.1270 OF 2021(G)

APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT DATED 23.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF CONSENT LETTER DATED 23.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELATIONSHIP CERTIFICATE NO.52327480 DATED 27.11.2020.

   EXHIBIT P4          TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER BEARING
                       NO.DSOPTA/408/2020-CS6          DATED
                       17.07.2020    ISSUED   BY   THE   3RD
                       RESPONDENT.

   EXHIBIT P5          TRUE   COPY   OF   THE   ORDER    DATED
                       21.04.2017    BEARING     NO.CS3-689/17
                       ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

   EXHIBIT P6          TRUE   COPY   OF   THE   ORDER    DATED
                       25.04.2017    BEARING     NO.CS3-704/17
                       ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

   EXHIBIT P7          TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 16.07.2020

IN WPC NO.7629 OF 2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE