Kerala High Court
C.K.Abdul Salam vs The District Supply Officer on 2 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2022/11TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 20994 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 C.K.ABDUL SALAM
AGED 55 YEARS
FATHIMA VILLA, KARUYACHERY,
NILESHWAR P.O., KASARAGOD-671314.
2 C.K.ABDUL KHADER,
NADEEM MANZIL, MARKET ROAD,
NEELESWARAM, KASARAGOD.
BY ADVS.
C.K.PAVITHRAN
NEENU PAVITHRAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER
CIVIL STATION, KASARAGOD-671315.
2 TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER,
HOSDURG, MINI CIVIL STATION, KANHANGAD-671315.
3 TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER,
VELLARIKKUNDU, VIA PARAPPA, VELLARIKKUNDU P.O.,
KASARAGOD-671315.
4 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY SMT.PARVATHY KOTTOL,GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
:2:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No.20994 of 2021
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2022
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
The petitioners, who are Authorised Wholesale
Distributors (AWD) appointed under the Kerala Rationing
Order, 1966 in Kasaragod District, are aggrieved by the
non-payment of dealers commission in respect of AWDs 11,
12 and 13.
2. The petitioners state that when Food Security Act,
2013 was enacted, a Door Delivery System was introduced.
While starting the Door Delivery System, the stock of ration
articles in possession of the petitioners as on the date, were
taken over by respondents 1 and 2. The shop records
including the Stock Register and Day Book were also taken
over by the respondents. The petitioners stated that from
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
December, 2016, the petitioners are not running the AWDs.
3. As per the earlier Scheme of ration distribution,
AWDs used to purchase food grains from FCI Depots on
payments and sell it to the Retail Distributors. The AWDs get
a margin by way of commission. The said commission is
paid by the respondents directly to the AWDs. While the
stock was taken over pursuant to the introduction of Door
Delivery System, payment of dealers' commission was not
made.
4. The petitioners submitted Exts.P1 and P2
representations to the 1 st respondent-District Supply Officer.
From the information availed by the petitioners under the RTI
Act, an amount of ₹5,34,809/- is due to the petitioner towards
commission amount. The non-payment of the commission to
the petitioners is highly arbitrary, contends the petitioners.
5. The 1st respondent resisted the writ petition filing
counter affidavit. The 1st respondent stated that the
petitioners are yet to receive the commission amount for the
month May, 2017. The commission has to be disbursed by
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
the Civil Supplies Commissioner. Such disbursement can be
done only after verifying the stock registers, records and
ledgers. The liabilities, if any, from the AWDs will have to be
deducted. According to the 1 st respondent, the petitioners
owe a liability of ₹5,58,325/- as arrears to the Government.
Therefore, it was not possible to pay the commission amount
of ₹5,34,809/- to the petitioners. The 1 st respondent,
however, stated that liability information regarding the audit
has been submitted to the Director of Civil Supplies and a
decision on payment of commission will be taken after the
Government takes a final decision.
6. The petitioners stated that they are not liable to
pay the amount of ₹5,58,325/- to the Government as alleged.
400 quintals AAY rice and 365 quintals of AAY rice were
found transferred to BPL stock on 08.04.2016 and
17.05.2016 respectively in AWD 11. It has been stated that
the rationed articles were distributed to the card holders free
of cost so that it did not create any liability. Similarly, it is
alleged that in AWD 12, 400 quintals of AAY rice is
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
transferred to APL normal rice and 280 quintals of AAY rice
is transferred in stock to APL subsidy rice and in this stock
transfer, there was a liability of ₹3,94,123/- since the
transferred rice was not retransferred when the stock was
available. Therefore, the allegation that the petitioners owe a
sum of ₹5,58,325/- to the Government is totally wrong.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader representing the
respondents.
8. The petitioners claim payment of commission fell
due to them prior to the introduction of Door Delivery System
consequent to the enactment of Food Security Act. The
counter affidavit filed by the 1 st respondent would show that
admittedly, the respondents are liable to pay commission
amount of ₹5,34,809/- to the petitioners.
9. The issue arises because the respondents found
on the basis of certain audit that the petitioners owe a larger
amount to the Government. The petitioners vehemently
controvert the said allegation. In the counter affidavit filed by
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
the 1st respondent, it has been stated that liability information
regarding the audit has been submitted to the Director of
Civil Supplies and a decision on payment of commission will
be taken once the final decision is taken by the Government.
10. It has to be noted that the alleged liability from the
petitioners is of the year 2016. The petitioners have ceased
to be in the business of ration distribution since December,
2006 onwards. More than five years have lapsed thereafter.
No liability has been fixed on the petitioners so far with notice
to them. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that
payment, if any, due to the petitioners cannot be withheld
further when the liability is not so far finally fixed on the
petitioners.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing
the 1st respondent to conduct an inspection of the records
relating to the transactions in question in the presence of the
petitioners. After giving an opportunity to the petitioners to
peruse the relevant records, the liability of the petitioners
should be computed. The commission amount payable to
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
the petitioners should be paid after adjusting liability, if any,
found due from the petitioners. This exercise shall be
completed within a period of two months.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/26.02.2022
W.P.(C) No.20994/2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20994/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
31.01.2021 FILED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
31.01.2021 FILED BY THE 2ND
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED
23.04.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXTS:
R1(a) COPY OF LETTER DT 21.3.2018 OF CIVIL SUPPLIES
COMMISSIONER.
R1(b) COPY OF INSPECTION REPORT DT NIL OF TSO,
KASARAGOD.
