Babychen Mukkadan vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 14813 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
         THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1943
                         WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021


PETITIONERS:

     1       BABYCHEN MUKKADAN
             AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.DEVASSIA,
             RATION CARD NO.1524012070, ARD NO.30,
             CHANGANASSERRY TALUK, CHANGANESSERRY,
             (PRESIDENT, ALL INDIA RATION CARD HOLDERS ASSOCIATION,
             NATIONAL COMMITTEE, GREATER KAILAS ENCLAVE I,
             NEW DELHI),
             RESIDING AT MUKKADAN VEEDU,
             KURISUMMOODU P.O., CHABNGANESSERRY,
             KOTTAYAM-686 104.

     2       P.K.JOSHY,
             AGED 68 YEARS, S/O.P.K.KRISHNAN,
             DEALER, ARD NO.137, EDAPPALLY NORTH,
             AIMS P.O., KANAYANNUR TALUK,
             ERNAKULAM,
             RESIDING AT PARAYAMPILLY HOUSE,
             EDAPPALLY NORTH, ERNAKULAM.

     3       ANTONY JOSEPH,
             AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.K.A.ANTONY,
             DEALER, ARD NO.1734-204, BOLGATTY,
             KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
             RESIDINGA AT KALLUVEETTIL HOUSE,
             KADAMAKKUDY, PIZHALA P.O.,
             ERNAKULAM-682 027.

     4       N.C.ABRAHAM,
             AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.CHERIYAN,
             KEROSENE WHOLESALE DEALER, KWD-4,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005,
             RESIDING AT NIVAS POONCH,
             PEROORKADA,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005.
 WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

                                    2



     5      KRISHNAN.C.M.,
            AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.ANUJAN BHATTATHIRIPPAD,
            KEROSENE WHOLESALE DEALER, LICENSEE NO.85-86,
            PATAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
            RESIDING AT CHEKUR MANA, AYYANTHOLE,
            THRISSUR-680 003.

            BY ADVS.
            K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
            SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI
            SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN



RESPONDENTS:

     1      UNION OF INDIA
            REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
            MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS,
            SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 001.

     2      STATE OF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT,
            GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

     3      THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
            PUBLIC OFFICE COMPLEX,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

            BY ADV SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA

            SMT. VINITHA BALAKRISHNAN, GP




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

                                         3




                                  JUDGMENT

Heard Sri.Jaju Babu, learned Senior Advocate

instructed by Smt.M.U.Vijayalakshmi on behalf of the

petitioners, Sri.P.Vijayakumar, learned ASGI on behalf

of the 1st respondent and Smt.Vinitha Balakrishnan,

learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 2 &

3.

2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the

allocation of kerosene for distribution under the Public

Distribution System for the State of Kerala is being

consistently reduced by the 1st respondent which leads to

a situation where, the allotment does not meet the

actual requirement. It is also stated that such a

reduction is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 & 21

of the Constitution of India. It is pointed out that

kerosene is an essential commodity and the unilateral

reduction of the quarterly quota ignoring the

recommendations of the 2nd respondent and the

requirements, is arbitrary.

WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

3. The learned ASGI has filed a statement on behalf

of the 1st respondent, wherein it is contended that the

petitioners have no legal or fundamental right to claim

the allocation of kerosene in the manner that they think

fit. In paragraph 3 of the statement, the rationale

behind the reduction of allocation of kerosene to the

States by the Government of India has been summarized as

follows:

"i. That the PDS Kerosene allocation is made by the Centre to the States on quarterly basis for the purpose of cooking and illumination only; ii. That LPG is a cleaner and environment friendly fuel as compared to Kerosene and thus, the Government has aimed to expand the coverage of LPG for cooking purposes and to commensurately reduce the PDS Kerosene allocation. iii. That similarly, expansion of electricity coverage in a Stage is also considered while reducing the PDS Kerosene allocation. iv. That due to a huge price difference between PDS Kerosene and transportation fuels, there is also a huge possibility of PDS Kerosene's diversion for adulteration and other unintended uses."

WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

It is further submitted that the Government of India has

taken a well considered policy decision in larger public

interest to reduce the quarterly allocation of PDS

kerosene to the States/UTs concerned, which is done on

the basis of LPG/PNG expansion, increase in

electrification coverage etc. of the respective

States/UTs. It is contended that this Court does not

generally interfere with such policy decisions.

4. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the

petitioners pointed out with reference to Exts.P2, P4,

P5 and P6, which are orders issued by the 1st respondent

relating to allocation of kerosene, that as far as West

Bengal is concerned, no reduction in the kerosene quota

is being made on account of orders issued by the Hon'ble

High Court of Calcutta in a writ petition pending before

it. It is hence prayed that the same treatment should

be afforded to the State of Kerala as well.

5. In answer to the above contention, it is stated

in the statement filed by the learned ASGI that the 1 st WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

respondent is not able to rationalize the PDS kerosene

allocation as far as the State of West Bengal is

concerned owing to an order of stay issued by the

Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta. It is stated that

except for West Bengal, the allocation to all other

States is being reduced. It is further submitted that

the writ petition before the Calcutta High Court is

seriously contested and that it is only because of the

exigency of Court work that the same is not getting

finally heard. It is also pointed out that similar writ

petition filed in the Madras High Court was dismissed.

6. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 2nd

respondent. It has stated therein that the State

Government has repeatedly addressed the Government of

India to enhance the kerosene allocation for the State.

It is further stated that in reply to a letter addressed

to the Government of India by the Hon'ble Chief

Minister, the Hon'ble Minister for Petroleum and Natural

Gas, Government of India has informed that the Ministry WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

of Petroleum and Natural Gas makes allocation of PDS

kerosene to the States on quarterly basis for the

purpose of cooking and lighting alone and that as on

01.06.2019, LPG coverage for the State is 107.5% and

coverage of households under electricity is 100% as on

26.06.2019. It is stated that since the allotment of

kerosene is purely decided by the Ministry of Petroleum

and Natural Gas, the State Government has no further

remarks on the issue.

7. In the light of the statements filed on behalf

of the respondents, I am of the opinion that the

grievance put forward by the petitioners cannot be

remedied by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The

reasons stated for reduction of kerosene allocation do

not warrant an interfere by this Court. In the

circumstances, the only observation that can be made by

this Court is that the 1st respondent shall give active

consideration to the request said to have been made by WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

the State Government for enhancing the kerosene quota to

the States.

The writ petition is closed with the above

observation.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE

Pn WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10724/2021

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POLICY DECISION COMMUNICATED TO THE LOK SABHA ON 11.08.2015 REGARDING THE SUBSIDIZED KEROSENE TO FISHERMEN.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION VIDE NO.P-

21016/01/2019-DIST DATED 29.03.2019 FORWARDED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ANNEXURES AND LIST OF STATES/UTS.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST VIDE NO.3096835/D3/2019/F & CSD DATED 03.07.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION VIDE NO.P-

21016/01/2019-DIST DATED 11.09.2019 FORWARDED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ANNEXURES AND LIST OF STATES/UTS.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION VIDE NO.M-

11021(16)/7/2020-DISTRIBUTION-PNG DATED 09.09.2020 FORWARDED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ANNEXURS AND LIST OF STATES/UTS.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION VIDE NO.M-

11021(16)/3/2020-DISTRIBUTION-PNG DATED 25.03.2021 FORWARDED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ANNEXURES AND LIST OF STATES/UTS.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 28.10.2016 IN WPC NO.25064/2016 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA.

WP(C) NO. 10724 OF 2021

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER VIDE NO.CCS/560/2019-A2-PART(2) DATED 03.03.2021 FORWARDED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE KEY OF REGISTER ABSTRACT OF THE PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IN THE WEBSITE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 30.03.2021.