Shri. Remanan vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 13718 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
    FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 4650 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

           SHRI. REMANAN,AGED 57 YEARS,S/O. MRITHYUNJAYAN,
           VARAPPURATH, MAYYANNUR P.O, VILIYAPPALLI,
           KOZHIKODE, VADAKARA, PIN-673 542

           BY ADVS.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
           SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE/SRI.P.PRIJITH
           SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
           SRI.R.GITHESH/SRI.AJAY BEN JOSE
           SRI.MANJUNATH MENON/SRI.SACHIN JACOB AMBAT
           SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN S.



RESPONDENT/S:

     1     THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
           (TAXES), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

     2     THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER,EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE,
           VIKAS BHAWAN P.O, NANDAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
           695 033

     3     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,EXCISE DIVISION
           OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 023

     4     THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
           SOUTHZONE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 033.

     5     THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE,
           EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, NEYYATTINKARA-695 121


OTHER PRESENT:

           SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN, GP



THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.07.2021,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE   FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) 4650/2021



                                       -2-


                     P V KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -
                        WP(C) No.4650 of 2021
   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                 Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2021

                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the absolute owner in possession

of a property having an extent of 9.72 Ares in

Re.Sy.No.29/2 of Neyyattinkara village. The petitioner

constructed a building in the property and the Municipality

concerned issued door Nos.895, 896, 897, 898, 899, 900,

901, 902, 903 and 904. The petitioner is conducting a hotel

business in the said building. The petitioner was issued a

business license for restaurant and lodging on 27.7.2020 by

Neyyattinkara Municipality as evident from Exts.P1 and

P2. According to the petitioner, he is conducting his hotel WP(C) 4650/2021

business under the name and style 'R B Palace' at T B

Junction, Neyyattinkara. The petitioner contends that on

6.1.2021, the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India

has issued a Four Star Classification Certificate for the

petitioner's hotel R B Palace as evident from Ext.P3. The

petitioner decided to obtain a Bar License for his hotel.

The petitioner obtained consent letter from the Kerala

Abkari Worker's Welfare Fund Board as evident from

Ext.P4. The petitioner also obtained a consent letter from

the Kerala Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Board on

12.1.2021 as evident from Ext.P5.

2. According to the petitioner, the Circle Inspector

of Excise, Neyyattinkara issued a certificate to the effect

that the petitioner is not an Abkari defaulter and he has not

convicted/acquitted in any NDPS case. Ext.P6 is the WP(C) 4650/2021

certificate. A similar clearance certificate was issued by

the Circle Inspector of Excise, Vadakara, as evident from

Ext.P7.

3. On 15.1.2021, the Assistant Engineer PWD

Road Section issued a letter addressed to the Excise Circle

Inspector, Neyyattinkara informing that there are two zebra

crosses between Neyyattinkara TB junction and Hospital

junction. The first zebra cross is 5 metres of the TB

junction and the second zebra cross is between RB Palace

Hotel and the Municipality. Ext.P8 is the certificate.

4. On 20.1.2021, the Circle Inspector of Excise,

Neyyattinkara wrote to the Deputy Excise Commissioner

regarding the application for issuance of a new FL-3

license at the petitioner's hotel. It was stated by the 5 th

respondent Circle Inspector of Excise, Neyyattinkara that WP(C) 4650/2021

while measuring the distance through the zebra cross in the

road on the North East of the petitioner's hotel, it is seen

that, at a distance of 60 meters, a school by name,

St.Philips English Medium School, Neyyattinkara, Holy

Queen English Medium Nursery School is situated. But, if

the distance is measured to the school, radially from the

middle gate of the hotel, it is reported that the school is

situated 13 metres away from the hotel. The distance from

the south-western gate of the hotel to the school is 14

meters and from the north - eastern gate to the school is 28

meters. It is also stated that from the south - western gate,

the distance to the said school is 98 metres, when measured

through zebra cross. Moreover a cross (കരശട) is situated

52 meters away from the north - eastern gate, when it is

measured through the zebra cross situated on northern WP(C) 4650/2021

side. It is also stated that at a distance of about 131 metres

from the north - eastern side, the Government JB School is

situated. It is further certified that the nearest objectionable

site, i.e, St.Philips English Medium School, Neyyattinkara,

Holy Queen English Medium Nursery School is situated 60

metres away from the petitioners hotel. It is also stated that

there are no objectionable sites like, temple, church,

mosque, educational institutions, crematory, SC/ST

colonies within 50 metres. Ext.P9 is the copy of the letter

of the 5th respondent, Circle Inspector of Excise addressed

to the 3rd respondent. Exts.P10 and P11 are the true copies

of site mahazar and location sketch prepared by the 5 th

respondent, the Circle Inspector of Excise, Neyyattinkara

based on which Ext.P9 was prepared. Exts.P12 and 13 are

the acknowledgments thereof to show that the petitioner WP(C) 4650/2021

had initially submitted application for issuance of FL-3

license on 14.1.2021. It is submitted that the application

was re-submitted as directed by the authorities. Ext.P14 is

the acknowledgment to show that the application was re-

submitted. Pursuant to Ext.P14 application, 4 th respondent

the Joint Commissioner of Excise issued a report to the 2 nd

respondent Excise Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram on

29.1.2021, informing that there is no objection for issuing

FL-3 license and recommended for the issuance of FL-3

license to the petitioner. Ext.P15 is the report. In Ext.P15,

it is specifically stated that there are no objectionable sites

within 50 metres of the petitioners establishment.

5. According to the petitioner, someone has filed a

complaint to the 2nd respondent regarding the petitioner's

hotel and his application for FL-3 license, on the basis of WP(C) 4650/2021

which, a letter was issued to the 3 rd respondent on 3.2.2021.

On 4.2.2021, the 3rd respondent replied to the 2nd

respondent that the distance to the schools were measured

as per the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and

measurement was through the zebra crossing and on

measurement, it was found that the nearest objectionable

site, i.e., St.Philips English Medium School, Neyyattinkara,

Holy Queen English Medium Nursery School is situated 60

metres away. It was further stated that on inspection, there

are no objectionable sites like temple, church, mosque,

educational institutions, crematory, SC/ST colonies within

50 metres. Ext.P16 is the report of the 3 rd respondent

addressed to the 2nd respondent. The 3rd respondent

concluded in Ext.P16 report that complaint need not be

considered in the circumstances.

WP(C) 4650/2021

6. Thereafter, on 18.2.2021, as per Ext.P17, the 2 nd

respondent has rejected the application for FL-3 license

submitted by the petitioner. The relevant portion of

Ext.P17 is extracted hereunder:-

"വവിദദേശ മദേദ ചടട 13 (3 ) പപ്രകകാരട 4

മമീറ്റർ ചനുറ്റളവവിനനുളവിൽ ആദക്ഷേപ്ര

സ്ഥലങ്ങൾ ഒനനുട തനന പ്രകാടവിലല എനന

നവിഷകർഷവിചവിടട്ടുളതകാണ. ആർ. ബവി.

         പ്രകാലസ ദഹകാടലവിന             ഏറ്റവനുട അടനുതനുള

         ഒബബ്ജക്ഷേണബവിൾ                സസൈറ്റകായ          നസൈൻറ

         ഫവിലവിപസ        ഇടഗമീഷ          മമീഡവിയട     സകസ്കൂൾ,

         നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര        ദഹകാളവി      കകമീൻ      ഇടഗമീഷ

         മമീഡവിയട              നഴസൈറവി                    സകസ്കൂൾ

         എനവിവവിടങ്ങളവിദലക്കേന                       ദഹകാടൽ

         ദഗേറ്റവിൽനവിനനുട    സൈമീപബകാ      ദപകകാസൈവിൽ       കസ്കൂടവി
 WP(C) 4650/2021






         അളനനു പ്രരവിദശകാധവിചതവിൽ 60                മമീറ്റർ ദേസ്കൂരട

കകാണനുനനു എങവിലനുട സൈമീപബകാ ദപകകാസവിലസ്കൂനട

അലലകാനത ടവി സ്ഥകാപ്രനതവിൻനറ മധദ

ഭകാഗേതനുള ദഗേറ്റവിൽ നവിനനുട ടവി

സ്ഥകാപ്രനതവിന എതവിർ ഭകാഗേതനുള

മമീറ്ററനുട നതക്കേനു - പ്രടവിഞകാറനു ഭകാഗേതനുള

ദഗേറ്റവിൽനവിനനുട 14 മമീറ്ററനുട വടക്കേനു-കവിഴക്കേനു

ഭകാഗേതനുള ദഗേറ്റവിൽനവിനനുട 28 മമീറ്ററനുട ദേസ്കൂരട

മകാപതമകാണനുളത. ഇപപ്രകകാരട സകസ്കൂളവിന

എതവിർവശതനുള നവറനുട 13 മമീറ്റർ അകലട

മകാപതമനുള ആർ ബവി പ്രകാലസ ദഹകാടലവിനനു

ബകാർ സലസൈൻസ അനനുവദേവിക്കേനുനത നവിയമ

നവിർമകാണതവിന ഉദദ്ദേശ ശനുദവിക്കേന

വവിരനുദമകാനണനനു കകാണനുനനു.

                  ദമൽ    സൈകാഹചരദതവിലനുട,                   നവിയമ
 WP(C) 4650/2021






          നവിർമകാണതവിന                               അന:സൈത

          പ്രരവിഗേണവിചട്ടുട ടവി സ്ഥകാപ്രനതവിന              നതകാടന

എതവിർ ഭകാഗേതനുള സകസ്കൂളവിദലക്കേനുള ദേസ്കൂരട

നവറനുട 13 മമീറ്റർ മകാപതട ഉളതവിനകാലനുട

തവിരനുവനനപ്രനുരട ബ്ജവിലലയവിൽ നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര

തകാലസ്കൂക്കേവിൽ നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര വവിദലലബ്ജവിൽ

സൈർദവ നമ്പർ 2-ൽ, നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര

മനുനവിസൈവിപകാലവിറ്റവിയവിൽ 40-)o വകാർഡവിൽ 895,

896, 897, 898, 899, 900, 901, 902, 903, 904 എനമീ

നകടവിട നമ്പറനുകളവിൽ പപ്രവർതവിക്കേനുന

ദഹകാടൽ ആർ ബവി പ്രകാലസ എന

സ്ഥകാപ്രനതവിന പ്രനുതവിയ എഫ എൽ -3

സലസൈൻസ അനനുവദേവിക്കേനുനതവിനകായവി ടവി

ദഹകാടലവിന നപപ്രകാസപപ്രറ്ററകായ

ദകകാഴവിദക്കേകാട ബ്ജവിലലയവിൽ വവിലദകാപളവി

വവിദലലബ്ജവിൽ മയനസ്കൂർ ദദേശതനു വരപട്ടുറതനു

സൈദരകാനവിവകാസൈവിൽ മമൃതദനുഞബ്ജയൻ മകൻ WP(C) 4650/2021

രമണൻ പ്രരകാമർശട (i) പപ്രകകാരട സൈമർപവിച

അദപ്രക്ഷേ നവിരസൈവിചട്ടു ഇതവിനകാൽ

ഉതരവകാകനുനനു".

7. The above Writ Petition is filed challenging

Ext.P17 order passed by the 2nd respondent.

8. Heard the learned senior counsel for the

petitioner, Shri S Sreekumar and the learned Government

Pleader.

9. The learned senior counsel submitted that even

if the school mentioned in Ext.P17 is situated within the

prohibited distance, in the light of Note (1) to Rule 13(3) of

the Foreign Liquor Rules, findings in Ext.P17 will not

stand. According to the senior counsel, the school is not an

educational institution recognised by the Government. WP(C) 4650/2021

Moreover, the learned senior counsel also relied on the

judgment of this court in State of Kerala and others v. M.

Vijaya Kumar [2009(1) KHC 522], in which it is stated that

the distance to be measured by taking the distance that a

law abiding pedestrian would walk through by using foot

path and zebra crossing. According to the senior counsel, if

that principle is taken, the school is situated about 60

metres away from the hotel premises. On these two points,

the senior counsel submitted that Ext.P17 is unsustainable.

10. The learned Government Pleader submitted that

even though the school, which is referred in Ext.P17 is not

a recognised school, a Writ Petition is pending before this

court with a prayer for the recognition of the said school.

The learned Government Pleader also submitted that it is a

school in which about 463 students are studying. The WP(C) 4650/2021

school is situated just opposite to the hotel building. The

learned Government Pleader submitted that this court may

not interfere with Ext.P17 order. The learned Government

Pleader also submitted that the school in question is

actually functioning as an annex to a recognized school.

Therefore, it cannot be said that it is not a recognized

school.

11. The short point to be decided is whether

Ext.P17 order is correct or not. In Ext.P17 order itself, it is

clearly stated that if the distance from the premises of the

petitioner to the school is measured through the zebra line,

it will be 60 metres. A division bench of this Court in M.

Vijaya Kumar (supra), considered this point in detail and

held that the distance to be measured by taking the

distance that a law abiding pedestrian would walk through WP(C) 4650/2021

by using foot path and zebra crossing. Paragraph Nos.5, 8

and 9 of the above judgment are extracted hereunder:-

"5. After considering the rival contentions, the learned single Judge, placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in State of Kerala vs. Sukumaran (1988 (2) KLT 261) held that the hostel is part of the educational institution and hence the distance rule contained in Rule 13(3) of the Foreign Liquor Rules very much applies to the hostel also. However, it was observed by the learned single Judge that the distance has to be measured from the 'main gate of the hostel' to the 'main gate of the hotel'. Taking note of the fact that the road in question has a 'central line' and also a 'zebra crossing' as divulged from Ext. P4 and relying on the mandate given by the Division Bench in Ext.P5 judgment, it was held that the distance had to be measured by taking the distance that a law abiding pedestrian would walk through, using the 'zebra cross' to reach the hotel from the hostel gate. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside and the Writ Petition WP(C) 4650/2021

was disposed of directing that the distance from the gate of the men's hostel of the Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram to the main gate of the petitioner's hotel shall be re-measured in terms of the above observation and to decide the issue afresh within the time as specified therein.

8. With regard to the mode of measurement of the prohibited distance, the learned single Judge has placed reliance on Ext.P5 judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court, wherein it has been categorically held that the measurement effected by the Commissioner therein from gate to gate along the foot path and through the zebra crossing, in conformity with the traffic rules, is perfectly in order. It is true that the said decision was rendered with reference to Rule 6 (2) of the of the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction ) Rules, 1974.

But the fact remains that the crux of Note (2) to Rule 13(3) of the Foreign Liquor Rules now relied on by the State/Department was also in existence in a more or less similar form as a 'Note' after the third proviso to Rule 6(2) of the Kerala Abkari Shops (Disposal in WP(C) 4650/2021

Auction)Rules, 1974 - having had been added as notified vide G.O.(MS.)No.136/86/TD dated 20.10.1986. The Note under Rule 13(3) of the Foreign Liquor Rules was further amended by adding the words " and the same will be measured from gate to gate" vide notification bearing No. G.O. (P) 30/93/TD dated 04.03.1993; which shows that the 'shortest distance' mentioned in the Note does not pave way to any illogical conclusions. Since the cause of action forming the subject matter of Ext. P5 judgment was of the year 1993 and since Ext.P5 verdict was passed by the Bench in October 1993 ( at a time when the restrictive Note was very much available under Rule 6(2) of the relevant Rules), it is rather puerile to contend by the State that the scope of such restriction is still to be unearthed. Anyhow, Ext. P5 judgment has not been challenged by the State and it has become final.

9. In the above circumstances, we find no grounds to interfere with the judgment passed by the learned single Judge. Both the appeals are dismissed accordingly. However, taking note of the fact that WP(C) 4650/2021

the time prescribed by the learned single Judge has already elapsed, we make it clear that the proceedings ordered to be finalised by the learned single Judge shall be completed within a further period of one month from today."

12. In the light of the aforesaid judgment it is clear

that the distance to be measured by taking the distance that

a law abiding pedestrian would walk through by using foot

path and zebra crossing. They measured the distance from

the gate to gate through the zebra crossing. Admittedly, it

is 60 meters. As per the rules, the school should not be

within 50 meters. If that is the case, according to me, the

issue is quitely covered by Vijaya Kumar's (supra) case.

The senior counsel brought to the notice of this court that

the Vijaya Kumar's (supra) case was challenged before the

Apex Court and Special Leave Petition was dismissed by WP(C) 4650/2021

the Apex court. A copy of the order was made available. It

is clear from the same that the S.L.P. No.12363 of 2009 is

dismissed by the Apex Court on 6.7.2009, which is the

special leave petition against the judgment of this court in

Vijaya Kumar's (supra) case. Therefore, according to me,

on this ground itself, Ext.P17 order will not stand.

13. Moreover, the petitioner produced an

application submitted under the Right to Information Act

before the Public Information Officer, District Educational

Officer, Neyyattinkara and the reply given by the officer

concerned. It will be better to extract the questions raised

in Ext.P18 and the answers in Ext.P19.

14. The questions in Ext.P18 are:-

WP(C) 4650/2021

1). St.Philips English Medium School, ടവി ബവി

ബ്ജടഗഷൻ, നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര എന

സകസ്കൂളവിന സൈടസ്ഥകാന സർകരന ന സൈവി

ബവി എസ സൈവി യനുനടദയകാ ഐ സൈവി എസ സൈവി

യനുനടദയകാ അടഗേമീകകാരട

ലഭവിചവിടട്ടുളതകാദണകാ, ആന ങൽ അടഗേമീകകാര സർടഫകറന ദകകാപവി തനനു

സൈഹകായവിക്കേണട.

2) St.Philips English Medium School, ടവി ബവി

ബ്ജടഗഷൻ നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര എന സകസ്കൂളവിൽ

നഴസൈറവി, സപപ്രമറവി, യനു പ്രവി, എചന എസ,

പ്ലസ ടനു എനവി വവിഭകാഗേങ്ങൾ

പപ്രവർതവിക്കേനുനനുദണകാ. പപ്രവർതവിക്കേനു

നനുനണങവിൽ ഈ വവിഭകാഗേങ്ങളട്ടുനട

അടഗേമീകകാര സർടഫകറന ദകകാപവി തനനു

സൈഹകായവിക്കേണട.

 WP(C) 4650/2021






             3).           അദത           നകടവിടതവിൽ             തനന

പപ്രവർതവിക്കേനുന Holy Queen English Medium

Nursery സകസ്കൂളവി ന യനുട സൈടസ്ഥകാന

സൈക്കേകാരവി ന ദയകാ തദദ്ദേശ സൈകയട

ഭരണതവി ന ദയകാ അടഗേമീകകാരട ലഭവിചവി

ടട്ടുദണകാ. ഉനണങവിൽ അടഗേമീകകാര സൈർടവിഫവി

ന ക്കേറ്റവി ദകകാപവി തനനു സൈഹകായവിക്കേണട."

15. The answers by the Public Information Officer are extracted hereunder:-

"1. നസൈൻറ .ഫവിലവിപസ ഇടഗമീഷ മമീഡവിയട

സകസ്കൂൾ, ടവി ബവി ബ്ജടഗഷൻ, നനയകാറ്റവിൻകര എന

ദപ്രരവിൽ ഈ വവിദേദകാഭദകാസൈ ന ഓഫമീസൈവി

പ്രരവിധവിയവിൽ ഒരനു സകസ്കൂളട്ടുട നവിലവവിലവിലല.

2. ബകാധകമലല.

WP(C) 4650/2021

3. നകാളവിതനുവനരയനുട സൈടസ്ഥകാന സൈർക്കേകാരവി ന അടഗേമീകകാരട ലഭവിചവിടവിലല."

16. From the above documents, it is clear that

St.Philips English Medium School, TB Junction,

Neyyattinkara, Holy Queen English Medium Nursery

School is not a school under the educational Officer

concerned. It is also stated that the school is not recognised

by the State Government.

17. Note (1) to Rule 13(3) of the Foreign Liquor

Rules reads like this:-

"Educational Institution" means schools or colleges under the control of State Education Department or Central Department or Central Board of Education and which has been duly WP(C) 4650/2021

recognised by the Government."

18. From the above note, it is clear that the

educational institution means schools or colleges under the

control of the said Educational Department or Central

Board of Education and which has been duly recognised

by the Government.

19. In the light of Exts.P18 and P19, the school

mentioned in Ext.P17 will not come in the purview of

educational institution mentioned in Note (1) to Rule 13(3)

of the Foreign Liquor Rules. On that ground also,

according to me, Ext.P17 will not stand.

20. At this stage, this court asked a query to the

senior counsel whether the school authorities is to be heard

before passing any order in this case. The senior counsel WP(C) 4650/2021

submitted that, when the matter came up before the other

statutory authorities no notice was issued to the school

authorities and there is no complaint by the school

authorities till now. The above submission is recorded. I

make it clear that if there is any grievance to the school

authorities mentioned in Ext.P17 order, they are free to file

Review Petition before this court. But that will not stand in

the way of issuing license to the petitioner.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is allowed in the following manner:-

(i) Ext.P17 order of the 2nd respondent is quashed.

(ii) The 2nd respondent is directed to pass consequential order and the competent authority will take necessary steps for granting license to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of WP(C) 4650/2021

this judgment.

Sd/-

P V KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

dl/ WP(C) 4650/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4650/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF BUSINESS LICENSE ISSUED BY THE NEYYATTINKARA MUNICIPALITY ON 27.07.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY TRADE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE NEYYATTINKARA MUNICIPALITY ON 27.07.2020.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF FOUR STAR CLASSIFICATION CERTIFICATE FOR THE PETITIONER'S HOTEL R.B. PALACE ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ON 06.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF CONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY THE KERALA ABKARI WORKER'S WELFARE FUND BOARD ON 08.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF CONSENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KERALA TODDY WORKER'S WELFARE FUND BOARD ON 12.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, NEYYATTINKARA ON 09.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, VADAKARA ON 11.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER I DATED 15.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER PWD ROAD SECTION ADDRESSED TO THE EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, NEYYATTINKARA.

WP(C) 4650/2021

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 20.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF SITE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, NEYYATTINKARA.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF LOCATION SKETCH PREPARED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, NEYYATTINKARA.

EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED ON RECEIPT OF APPLICATION OF PETITIONER ON 14.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED ON RECEIPT OF APPLICATION OF PETITIONER ON 09.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED ON RECEIPT OF APPLICATION OF PETITIONER ON 23.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF REPORT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 29.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF REPORT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 04.02.2021.

EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS NO.

EXC/857/2021 XC7, DATED 18.02.2021 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE