Kerala High Court
The Assistant Officer vs Aqua Sea Food (India) Pvt. Ltd on 9 April, 2024
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 987 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 28.05.2018 IN WP(C) NO.30322 OF
2010 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:-[RESPONDENTS 1,2,& 4 IN THE WP(C)]
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
LABOUR AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 THE SECRETARY,
FISHERIES DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER(TAXES)
SRI. ARUN AJAY SHANKAR - SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:-[PETITIONER & 3rd RESPONDENT IN THE WP(C)]
1 SEAFOOD EXPORTERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA
(KERALA REGION),
SEAFOOD HOUSE,
WILLINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN-682 003,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR. K.G.LAWRANCE.
2 THE KERALA FISHERMAN WELFARE FUND BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ASOK M.CHARIYAN, SC, KFWFB
Joe J Uruvath
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
2
SABIR N.S.(K/1554/2020)
PREMJIT NAGENDRAN ERNAKULAM
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 944 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 19.09.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.22915 OF 2010 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:-[RESPONDENTS 1,2,4&5 IN THE W.P(C)]
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
LABOUR AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
2 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
3 THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
4 THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES, ALAPPUZHA.
SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:-[PETITIONER AND 3rd RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 COCHIN FROZEN FOOD EXPORTS PVT.LTD,
AROOKUTTY FERRY ROAD, AROOR P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688534,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
K PRABHAKARAN.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
4
2 THE KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY ADVS.
Joe J Uruvath
SABIR N.S.(K/1554/2020)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.987/2019, 955/2019 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 955 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 28.05.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.31974 OF 2010 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:[RESPONDENTS 1,2,4&5 IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
LABOUR AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
2 THE SECRETARY,
FISHERIES DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
4 THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES, O/o THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM,PIN-691001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENTS:[PETITIONERS AND 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 MANGALA MARINE EXIM INDIA (P) LTD.
CCXVI/368, BHAT MEMORIAL BUILDING,
THOPPUMPADY, COCHIN-682005,
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR.M.R.ASHOK BHAT.
2 KINGS MARINE PRODUCTS,
ULIYAKOVIL,KOLLAM-9,
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
6
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE,MR.MANOJ.T.VARGHESE.
3 THE KERALA FISHERMAN WELFARE FUND BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-691001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
SRI.ASOK M.CHARIYAN, SC, KFWFB
JOE J URUVATH, SC, KERALA FISHERMEN WELFARE BOARD
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024 , ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1048 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 03.07.2018 IN WP(C) NO.3773 OF
2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
APPELLANTS:[1ST RESPONDENT & ADDL. R.3 IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, AZHEEKODE
P.O., THRISSUR, PIN-680 673.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION, THRISSUR.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENTS:[ PETITIONER & ADDL. R2 IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 SAFA ENTERPRISES
BUILDING NO.450A, LIGHT HOUSE JUNCTION, AZHEEKODE,
THRISSUR-680 673, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER, MR.ABDUL JALEEL.
2 THE KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR-02.
BY ADVS.
Joe J Uruvath
SABIR N.S.(K/1554/2020)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.02.2024,
ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON
09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1441 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.24596 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 013.
SRI.MPHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPL. GP
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S SAN MARINE EXPORTS
SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM-691 581,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR. SOLOMON ANTONY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1445 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.22006 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 002.
SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S CAPITHAN EXPORTING COMPANY
PORT ROAD, SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM-691581,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER S.ALWYN.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1452 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.22055 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691582.
SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S.KING FISHERIES (P) LIMITED
NEENDAKARA P.O, KOLLAM-691582, REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR.TERENCE STANLEY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
11
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1456 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.22054 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 582
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:[ PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/s. POYILKADA FISHERIES (P)LTD.
P.B. NO. 41, PARAMESWAR NAGAR, KOLLAM-691 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, MR. REGI ASOK.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024 , ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1457 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.22035 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691582.
SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S INDIAN AQUATIC PRODUCTS
SAKTHIKULANGARA,KOLLAM-691581, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING PARTNE,MR.PHILOMENE ANTONY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1464 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.17885 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682018.
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
AQUA SEA FOOD (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,
22/1177, N.H.47, EDAKOCHI,
NEAR EDAKOCHI-AROOR BRIDGE, COCHIN-682006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ABDUL ZIYAD.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1482 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.24592 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM - 691013.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/s.BABY MARINE (EASTERN) EXPORTS
KALLUVILA, THANKASSERY, KOLLAM, PIN- 691007,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER JOHN GEORGE
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024 , ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1495 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.27939 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 582.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S. SAN MARINE EXPORTS
SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM-691 581 REPRESENTED BY
ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR. SOLOMON ANTONY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024 , ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1497 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.22005 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM -691 001
SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S. BABY MARINE EXPORTS
KALLUVILA, THANGASSETRI, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY
ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR.K.C.BABU, PIN-691 007
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1514 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.15537 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN - 682 018
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:- (PETITIONERS IN THE W.P.(C))
1 MANAGALA MARINE EXIM INDIA (P) LTD.
BHAT MEMORIAL BUILDING, THOPPUMPADY,
KOCHI - 682 005, REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR,
MR. PREMACHANDRA BHAT.
2 SAMARAT MIDDLE EAST EXPORTS (P) LTD.
18/75, PARRY JUNCTION, THOPPUMPADY,
KOCHI - 682 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
RAJU N.V.
3 A.S. MARINE INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,
CC 18/263, NADAKKAVU ROAD, KOCHI - 682 006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.E.
SULAIMAN
4 CAP SEAFOODS PVT. LTD.,
1/17, VYPEEN ISLANDS, AZHEEKKAL P.O.,
VYPEEN - 682 510, REPRESENTD BY ITS DIRECTOR,
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
18
SHAKKEEL MOHAMMED IQBAL
5 GEO SEAFOODS,
PALLICHAL ROAD, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN - 682 006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.G.
LAWRENCE
6 SAFERA FOODS INTERNATIONAL,
IX/477, KANNAMALY P.O., COCHIN - 6820 08,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, FEMINA V.S.
7 EMERALD EXPORTS AND IMPORTS,
EMERALD HOUSE, DOOR NO. CC XIII/1380, S.P. PURAM
ROAD, PALLURUTHY, P.O., COCHIN - 682 006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER CHAKOCHAN P.C.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1520 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.25445 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ERNAKULAM-682 031
BY SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ-SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S.ABAD FISHERIES (P) LTD.
ABAD BUILDINGS, JEW TOWN ROAD, COCHIN-682002,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
MR.ANWAR HASHIM
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
20
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1522 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.25443 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.C)
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ERNAKULAM 682 031.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN THE W.P.C:
M/S.BABY MARINE INTERNATIONAL,
THOPPUMPADY, COCHIN 682 005,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
MR. ALEX.K. NINAN.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, THE COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1545 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.21968 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691001.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAQFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S.KINGS MARINE PRODUCTS
ULIYAKOVIL, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF
EXECUTIVE, MR.MANOJ T.VARGHESE, PIN-691019.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1546 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.16391 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION,
DR.SALIM ALI ROAD, COCHIN-682018.
BY ADV SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
LOURDE EXPORTS,
DOOR NO.2659 J, 1ST FLOOR, VIDYA NAGAR MAIN ROAD,
VIDYA NAGAR, COCHIN-682020, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGER GEO JACOB.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1550 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04/07/2018 IN WP(C)
NO.17891 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD, COCHIN-
682 018
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENTS:(PETITIONERS IN THE W.P.(C))
1 S.H.MARINE EXIM
22/1369, EDACOCHIN, COCHIN-682 006, REPRESENTED
BY ITS PARTNER SHIRAJ V.H.
2 PARAMOUNT SEAFOODS,
XVI/1373 E, MEHRAB BUILDING,
PATEL MARKET ROAD, COCHIN-682 005,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHIRAJ V.H.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1551 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.15875 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- [RESPONDENTS IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682018.
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- [PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
PREMIER SEAFOODS EXIM (P) LTD
EP X/289, ERAMALEELOOR, ALLEPPY DISTRICT-688527,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, AHMED AHZAR.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1578 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.16917 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682 018
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
COCHIN COSMOS FOODS LTD.
18/47 BABY MARINE COMPOUND, THOPPUMPADY, COCHIN-
682 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR ALEX NINAN.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1665 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.18887 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- [RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682018.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:- [PETITIONERS IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 INDOFRENCH SHELLFISH COMPANY (P) LTD.,
12/1008 B, 'VIGNESH', ANDI ACHARI ROAD,
COCHIN-682002,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
K.MADHUKUMAR.
2 K.MADHUKUMAR,
PROPRIETOR, VIGNESH FOODS,
ANDI ACHARI ROAD, COCHIN-682002
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
27
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1749 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26949 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE WP(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA - 688 001.
SPECIAL GOVT. PLEADER MUHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE WP(C)]
M/S.DOLPHIN WIRES (P) LTD.
AP II/722, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
AROOR-688 534, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR K.A.JABIR
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
28
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1750 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26943 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA - 688 001.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S.INTERNATIONAL FREEZE FISH EXPORTS,
AP II/810, C.I.E., AROOR - 688 534,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING R.VAMANA KINI.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.20204 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
29
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1767 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.27270 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
BY SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ-SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S FRIENDS MARINE INDUSTRIES
XIV/465, EZHUPUNNA, ALAPPUZHA-688 548,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER. A.S. MOHAMMED.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
30
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1768 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.29926 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, OFFICE OF THE
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, ALAPPUZHA 688 001.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S. INTERFISH
7/118, CHANDIROOR, ALAPPUZHA - 688 547,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER P.A MINHAS
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
31
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1770 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.28636 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S.GEO AQUATIC PRODUCTS PVT.LTD.
VELUTHULLY ROAD, CHANDIROOR-688547, REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, C.A SALIM.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
32
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1773 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 4.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.27271 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.C)]
M/S INTERSEAS
7/119, CHANDIROOR,ALAPPUZHA-688 547,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER NOBY KARIKKASERRY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
33
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1774 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 4.07.2018 IN WP(C) NO.5863
OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.C)
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.C)
ABAD SEAFOOD PROCESSORS,
AROOR.P.O., CHERTHALA ABAD BUILDING, PIN-688534,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER FARAZ JAVEED.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
34
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1787 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.30313 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY
DIRECTOR,ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMEED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
ACCELERATED FREEZE DRYING COMPANY LTD.
EP IV/513,EZHUPUNNA,ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICE PRESIDENT S.P.KAMATH.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
35
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1791 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26283 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688001
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
FRONTLINE EXPORTS (P) LTD
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AROOR-688534, REPRESENTED BY
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR M.S.ANAZ
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
36
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1803 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.25444 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ERNAKULAM-682031.
SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S.ABM MARINE PRODUCTS
19/2084E NAMBIAPURAM, PALLURUTY, COCHIN-682006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. K.MADHUKUMAR.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
37
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1804 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26329 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688001.
SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENTS [PETITIONERS IN THE W.P.(C)]:
1 M/S A.M.FISHERIES
XVIII/378, KAKKAZHOM,
VANDANAM P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA-688005,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER M.NIZAM.
2 PREMIER MARINE FOODS,
NIZAM MANZIL, VANDANAM P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA-688005,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER M.NIZAM.
3 PREMIER EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,
AP X/453, CHANIROOM,
ALAPPUZHA-688535,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER M.NIZAM.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
38
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
39
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1805 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26315 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA - 688 001
BY SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ-SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S.MOON FISHERIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
11/722/D, INDUSTRIES ESTATE, AROOR,
ALAPPUZHA - 688 534,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR GEORGE
P.KORAH
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
40
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1806 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26927 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001
BY SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ-SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S. PREMIER MARINE EXPORTS
AX/456,CHANDIROOR, ALAPPUZHA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER M.NIZAM
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
41
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1810 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26484 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691582.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S. ROYAL OCEANS
AP XII/528, OLD NH CHANDIROOR, AROOR,
ALLEPPEY-688547, KERALA,
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT KALLUVILA, THANGASSETRI, KOLLAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR. JACOB K
BABU.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
42
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1812 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.16622 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD, COCHIN-
682018.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
FREEZE ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.
XVI/1109, COCHIN FISHERIES HARBOUR,
THOPPUMPADY, COCHIN-682005,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, RAGHU NARAYAN POTTY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
43
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1814 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.28466 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - GP
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
P.A.MINHAS
PROPRIETOR, PEARL COAST MARINE FOODS, APX/763F,
CHANDIROOR, ALAPPUZHA-688 547.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
44
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1815 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.17150 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682 018.
BY SPL. GP- MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
HEIPLOEG SEAFOODS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
KAY KAY HOUSE, 39/116, MULASHERRY CANAL ROAD,
COCHIN-682 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
VIVEK VIJAYKUMAR.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
45
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1818 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.24331 OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- {RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 582.
BY SRI.MUHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:[ PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S INDIAN ACQUATIC PRODUCTS
SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM-691 581,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. PHILOMENE ANTONY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
46
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1821 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C) NO.9236
OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- ( RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682018.
BYSRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:- (PETITIONERS IN THE W.P.(C))
1 PARAGON SEAFOODS (P) LTD.,
P.B.NO.817, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-682005,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
JOSEPH ANTONY.
2 ABAD FISHERIES (P) LTD.,
ABAD BUILDING, KOCHUANGADI,
COCHIN-682002, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
JAVED HASHIM.
3 ABAD C-FOOD CANNING CO.(P)LTD.,
ABAD BUILDING, KOCHANGADI,
COCHIN-682002,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, JAVED HASHIM.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
47
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
48
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1822 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 4.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.24683 OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 582
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.C]
M/S. VERONICA MARINE EXPORTS (P) LTD
PUTHETHORA, NEENDAKARA POST, KOLLAM-691 582,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGERS..ALWYN
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
49
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1825 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 4.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26454 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.C:
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.C):
M/S HIGH SEAS EXIM
AP X/102, CHANDIROOR, ALAPPUZHA-688 547,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SULFIKAR V.K.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
50
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1838 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.17712 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN-682 018.
BY SPL. GP- MUHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
JIS INTERNATIONAL EXPORTS PVT.LTD.
28/60A-1, FIRST FLOOR, G-107, PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
COCHIN-682 036, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR DOMINIC SEBASTIAN.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
51
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1839 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26926 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA - 688 001.
BY SPL. GP- MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S. CHERUKATTU INDUSTRIES (MARINE DIVISION),
AROOKUTTY FERRY ROAD, AROOR 688 434
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER C.A. NAZER.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
52
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1850 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.6425 OF 2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM - 691 582
BY SPL. GP - MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
CHARLY FISHERIES,
MAMACHAN TURUTHU, NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM - 691 582,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
MR. THULASIDHARAN PILLAI
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
53
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1852 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.20802 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN- 682018.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
CHOICE CANNING COMPNAY,
(A DIVISION OF CHOICE TRADING CORPORATION PRIVATE
LIMITED), 21/1391-A, THANGAL NAGAR, NEAR
PASHNITHODU PALAM, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN- 682006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR P.BALACHANDRAN.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
54
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1861 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C) NO.913
OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN 682018.
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ- SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
ABAD OVERSEAS (P) LTD
ABAD BUILDING, KOCHANGADI, KOCHIN-682003,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ANWAR
HASHIM.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
55
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1870 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.10728 OF 2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- [RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM - 691 581
BY SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ -SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- [PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
XAVIER LUKE FERNANDEZ
PROPRIETOR, LUKE EXPORTS, SHAKTHIKULANGARA,
KOLLAM - 691 581
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
56
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1879 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.25486 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,ERNAKULAM-682031
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
ALAPPAT MARINE PRODUCTS,
6TH FLOOR, HOUSE OF ALAPPATT, M.G ROAD,
COCHIN-682 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF
ATTORNEY MR. SURESH K.N
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
57
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1880 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.13768 OF 2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-(RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691581.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S.AVLA NETTOS EXPORTS,
SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM-691581, REPRESENTED BY
ITS MANAGER, MR.SURESH BABU.
BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
58
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1883 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26448 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA 688 001.
SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
G.RATNAKARAN PILLA
PROPRIETOR, R.K EXPORTS, VIII/249 EZHUPUNNA P.O,
CHERTHALA 688 550.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024,ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
59
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1888 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.26437 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
PREMIER MARINE ENTERPRISES.
EP IX/315, ERAMALOOR, ALAPPUZHA-688537,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER AHMED AZHAR.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
60
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1917 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.7444 OF 2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM - 691003.
BY SRI.MUHAMMED RAFEEQ-SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- [ PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S.ESMARIO EXPORT ENTERPRISES (P) LTD
KAVANAD P. O., KOLLAM - 691003, REPRESENTED BY
ITS GENERAL MANAGER, MR. INNOCENT JOSEPH.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
61
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1937 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.37568 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES AND ASSESSING
OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ALAPPUZHA - 688 001
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
RESPONDENT:[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/s. PENVER PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.
AP 11/688, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AROOR, ALEPPEY -
688 534, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER
NELSON GEORGE
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024 , ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON THE 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
62
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1966 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.37556 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- [RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES AND THE
ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001
BY SRI.MUHAMMED RAFEEQ -SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- [PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
THREE STAR MARINE EXPORTS
AROOR, ALLEPPY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER, AHMED KUTTY.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
63
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1972 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 19.09.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.29178 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:- (RESPONDENTS 1, 2, 4 & 5 IN THE W.P.(C))
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
LABOUR AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001
2 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001
3 THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001
4 THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688001
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:- (PETITIONER & 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
1 COCHIN FROZEN FOOD EXPORTS PVT.LTD.,
AROOKUTTY FERRY ROAD, AROOR.P.O, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, PIN-688534,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
K.PRABHAKARAN.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
64
2 THE KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001
BY ADVS.
Joe J Uruvath
SABIR N.S.(K/1554/2020)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
65
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 1984 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.23798 OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
KOLLAM-691 582
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-(PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
M/S.POYILAKADA FISHERIES (P) LTD.
P.B. NO. 41, PARAMESWAR NAGAR, KOLLAM-691 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER-MR. REGI ASOK.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
66
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 2066 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.31168 OF 2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE ASSESSING OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ERNAKULAM DIVISION, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD,
COCHIN - 682 018
BY SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ -SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT/S:- [PETITIONERS IN THE W.P.(C)]
1 MOON FISHERY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED
G-225, 1ST FLOOR, PANAMPAPPLY NAGAR,
KOCHI - 682 036, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR DOMINIC SEBASTIAN.
2 M/S. CHEMMEENS (REGISTERED)
CHEMMEENS JUNCTION, KARUVELIPADY,
KOCHIN - 682 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER P.C. CHERIAN
3 SLS EXPORTS PRIVATE LTD.,
XXII/1377, EDAKOCHI, KOCHIN - 682 010,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER K. VIJAYA KUMAR
4 K.K. LIRAR
PROPRIETOR, L.G. SEA FOODS, 18/343,
PALLURUTHY NADA, KOCHIN - 682 006
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
67
5 ACCELERATED FREEZE DRYING COMPANY LTD.
AMALGAM HOUSE, BRISTOW ROAD, WILLINGDON ISLAND,
KOCHIN - 682 003, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE
PRESIDENT, S.P. KAMATH
6 STAR FISH EXPORT
22/1318, PEEVEES BUILDING, EDAKOCHI, KOCHI - 682
006, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, V.
GEORGE JOSEPH
7 NATIONAL SEAFOODS COMPANY
11/424, SRAMPICKAL ROAD, CHULLIKKAL, KOCHIN - 682
005, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, O.T.
ALEXANDER
8 ABAD EXIM PRIVATE LTD.,
PLOT NO. 31 AN 33, COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE,
KAKKANAD, KOCHIN - 682 030, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANWAR HASIM
9 K. KRISHNA KUMAR
PROPRIETOR, KAY KAY EXPORTS, 39/116, KAY KAY
HOUSE, MULASSHARRY CANAL ROAD, KOCHI - 682 011
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
68
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 2112 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.33902 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:- (RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C))
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES AND ASSESSING
OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE FISHERIES DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:- (PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C))
G.K.S BUSINESS ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.,
GKS COMPLEX, AROOR FERRY ROAD, AROOR-688534,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR G. GIRISHANKAR.
BY ADV SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
69
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 2138 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2018 IN WP(C)
NO.24348 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:-[RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C)]
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,
CALICUT - 673 301.
BY SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ - SPECIAL GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
RESPONDENT:-[PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C)]
M/S. UNIROYAL MARINE EXPORTS LIMITED,
11/19, VENGALAM P.O., CALICUT - 673 303,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE MR.THOMAS
T.KOSHY.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
14.02.2024, ALONG WITH WA.944/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.04.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
70
JUDGMENT
[WA Nos.987/2019, 944/2019, 955/2019, 1048/2019,
1445/2019, 1441/2019, 1457/2019, 1495/2019, 1482/2019,
1456/2019, 1452/2019, 1497/2019, 1464/2019, 1545/2019,
1550/2019, 1514/2019, 1520/2019, 1522/2019, 1551/2019,
1546/2019, 1578/2019, 1665/2019, 1749/2019, 1770/2019,
1791/2019, 1750/2019, 1787/2019, 1767/2019, 1804/2019,
1805/2019, 1803/2019, 1773/2019, 1774/2019, 1768/2019,
1806/2019, 1810/2019, 1821/2019, 1818/2019, 1812/2019,
1838/2019, 1822/2019, 1861/2019, 1814/2019, 1879/2019,
1825/2019, 1815/2019, 1850/2019, 1839/2019, 1852/2019,
1870/2019, 1880/2019, 1883/2019, 1888/2019, 1917/2019,
1937/2019, 1966/2019, 1972/2019, 1984/2019, 2138/2019,
2066/2019, 2112/2019]
1. Among the captioned writ appeals, WA No.987/2019 is
the lead case arising out in the adjudication of W.P.
(C)No.30322/2010 wherein the Association called Seafood
Exporters Association of India, Kerala region and other
individual exporters altogether had challenged the competence
of the State in promulgating an Act called Kerala Fishermen's
And Allied Workers Welfare Cess Act, 2007, primarily on two
grounds:
(i) State did not have the legislative competence to
cause a declaration that the exporters of seafood are liable to
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
pay Cess, interest on penalty under the Act.
(ii) There had already been an adjudication on the issue
by the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in Koluthara
Export v. State of Kerala [2002 (2) SCC 459] whereby
provisions of Section 4(2) of Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Fund
Act, 1985 was held to be unconstitutional.
2. State in the year 1985 had brought into force Kerala
Fishermen's Welfare Fund Act, 1985 (hereinafter called 'the
1985 Act') with objects and reason that the fishermen who
belong to weaker section of Society have not been able to
achieve the purpose for which earlier schemes were
promulgated and the aforementioned Welfare Fund for
promotion of the welfare of the fishermen was incorporated.
Section 2(a), 2(bb) and 2(d) of the Act defined 'Allied Workers',
'Contributions' and 'Dealer'. The Clauses which are relevant for
adjudication of the present intra court appeals are Allied worker,
Contribution and Dealer. The same are extracted hereinbelow:
"allied worker" means any person who is engaged mainly in
fishery related activities for his livelihood and who does not
come under the definition of the term fisherman in clause (e)
of section 2 of the Kerala Fisherman's Welfare Societies Act,
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
1980 (7 of 1981) and includes beach workers, small scale
fish distributors, fish curers, peeling workers and small scale
processing plant workers, who are not members or not
eligible to get membership, in any other Statutory Welfare
Scheme.
2(bb) "contribution" means the sum of money payable to
the fund under section 4 ;
2(d). "dealer" means any person who carries on, within the
State of Kerala the business of buying or selling or
processing fish or exporting fish (in raw or in processed
form) or fish products and includes,"
3. Section 4 envisaged the procedure for contribution to
the fund. It is extracted hereinbelow:
"(1) Every fisherman shall contribute to the Fund
every year at such rate, as may be fixed by the
Government, from time to time on the recommendation of
the Board.
(1A) Every allied worker shall contribute to the Fund,
every month, at such rate as may be fixed by the
Government from time to time, on the recommendation of
the Board.
(2) A dealer shall contribute to the Fund, every year,
one per cent of his sale proceeds in the year
(3) The owner of a fishing vessel of any category,
shall contribute to the Fund every month an amount, at such
rate, as may be fixed by the Government from time to time,
on the recommendation of the Board to that category of
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
fishing vessel.
(4) The owner of a stakenet or chinanet shall
contribute to the Fund, at such rate, as may be fixed by the
Government, from time to time, on the recommendation of
the Board, for nine months every year.
(5) The owner of a prawn filtration area or a prawn
culture farm or a fish farm shall contribute to the fund every
year, at such rate per hectare, as may be fixed by the
Government, from time to time, on the recommendation of
the Board.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section
"prawn filtration area" means any water logged area, where
prawn filtration is carried on
"Prawn Culture Farm" means a farm where prawn,
including scampi, are cultured
(5A) In calculating the extent of the area, half hectare and
above shall be taken as one hectare and areas below half
hectare shall be ignored.
(5B) The owners of fish markets or lessees or licensees or
any person claiming, any right or interest, through such
owners, or the owners of the ice plants supplying ice, mainly
for the processing of fish and the vehicles engaged, mainly
for the transportation of fish, shall contribute to the fund
every year, at such rate, as may be fixed the Government,
from time to time, on the recommendation of the Board.
(6) A person who employs a fisherman in a fishing
vessel shall be liable to pay under sub-section (7) the
contribution payable by that fisherman under sub-section (1)
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
after deducting that amount from the wages or other
remuneration due to such fisherman.
(7) The contributions shall be paid to the fisheries
Officer or to any officer of the Board authorised by the Board
in this behalf.
(8) The amount of contribution shall be rounded off to
the nearest rupee and, where such amount contains part of
a rupee consisting of paise, then, if such part is fifty paise or
more, it shall be increased to one rupee and if such part is
less than fifty paise it shall be ignored. "
4. By reading the definition of 'dealer' under Section
4(2) a dealer shall contribute to the fund, every year, one
percent(1%) of the sale proceeds in the year. The said
provisions of the Act was challenged before Single Bench and
Division Bench of High Court whereby the validity of the
aforementioned Act was upheld. Matter was taken up before the
Supreme Court and was referred to the Constitution Bench as
stated supra. The Constitution Bench in paragraph '18' of the
judgment held that when any statute of a State or any provision
therein is questioned on the ground of lack of legislative
competence, the State cannot claim legitimacy for enacting the
impugned provisions with a reference to provisions in Part IV of
the Constitution. It must be demonstrated with reference to one
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
or more of the entries in Lists II and III of the Seventh schedule
of the Constitution. By noticing entry 23 of list III-Concurrent
List and the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Act,
it was noticed that the said provisions postulates social security
and welfare measures for fishermen. In other words, it was held
that the State no doubt had the competence to come out with a
legislation for the social security and welfare measures but there
has to be nexus for the purpose of charging the contribution. By
noticing the business activity of the petitioners therein, it was
noticed that there was no relationship of "employer and
employee" between the contributor and the beneficiary of the
provisions of the Act and Scheme made thereunder. The only
nexus between the categories of persons covered by the sweep
of Clause (d) of Section 2 of 1985 Act included that exporters
for carrying on the business of buying or selling or processing
fish or exporting fish in 'raw or processed form' or fish products
including a commission agent, a broker or any other mercantile
agent, by whatever the name called, and a non-resident dealer
or an agent or a non-resident dealer or a local branch of a firm
or a company or an association situated outside of the State of
Kerala and the beneficiaries under the Act and Scheme. In such
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
a narrow compass, it was noticed that the former are the
purchaser and the latter are the catchers and sellers of the fish.
Such a nexus was held to be not sufficient to burden a
purchaser/exporter with the impost or levy of contribution under
Section 4(2) of the Act and accordingly it was struck down in
paragraph 23.
5. The things did not stop here. After a gap of almost
four(4) years, State of Kerala came out with an ordinance
No.57/2006 Kerala Fishermen's and Allied Workers' Welfare
Cess Ordinance 2006. In the aforementioned ordinance, the
definition of a dealer defined under Section 2(d) was
synonymous with the definition of dealer in the 1985 Act.
Similarly 'sale proceeds' under the erstwhile Act in Section 2(jd)
and Section 2(k) of Ordinance. Not only this, the definition of
'Allied workers' in Section 2(a) of 1985 Act and of the Ordinance
were also replica.
6. The Ordinance continued to remain in force as the
house could not pass the bill on time. Association submitted a
representation Ext.P3 in WP(C)No.30322/2010 dated
16.04.2007. The contents of the same reads as under:
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
"The Kerala Legislative Assembly has passed the above bill
on 22.3.2007. We, the Seafood Exporters of Kerala, are
worst affected second time again by this bill, due to following
reasons.
The above bill is the offshoot of Kerala Fishermen Welfare
Fund Act 1985 (Act of 30, 1985) which provided contribution
of 1% on the sale proceeds of dealers (exporters). The
exporters (dealers) have no employer-employee relation with
fishermen. This was challenged before the Court and finally
the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
declared the relevant section 4 (2) unconstitutional thereby
the levy became illegal. On a plea of Government, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court ordered not to refund the levy
already collected by the Government till then. A copy of the
Judgment in the Case of "Koluthara Exports Ltd., Vs State of
Kerala & Othrs" is attached herewith for your kind perusal,
particularly last three paragraphs.
The present Bill of 2007 also proposed similar levy by way of
"CESS" which is illegal and contrary to the decisions of
Hon'ble Supreme Court. This will lead to multiplicity of
litigations over years and also huge amounts of deposits for
Stay and other proceedings. The exporters would lose all
such deposits as in the earlier decisions (last paragraph of
the Judgment). If implemented none of the exporters would
pay the cess, instead would challenge the constitutionality of
the levy before the High Courts, thereby the purpose of
collecting revenue for the welfare fund would be defeated.
Moreover the net realization on sale by fishermen will be
substantially reduced, the processing and export earnings of
Kerala State would be drastically dropped thereby losing
foreign exchange to the State and Country without achieving
any benefit from the Exporters.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
Sir, you are the protector of the Constitution and hence
please consider all the facts and circumstances and exempt
us from above levy and oblige."
7. On 13.10.2007, Act 9 of 2007 was notified and came
into effect from 18.02.2006. The definition of the "Allied
Workers" as per the previous Act and Ordinance had undergone
certain change, similarly definition of "Dealer" as well as "Sale
Proceeds". The expression 'exporters' was taken out from the
purview of the Act. The aims and objects with which the Act
came into force by the legislature reads thus:
As per Section 4 (2) of The Kerala Fishermen's
Welfare Fund Act 1985 (Act 30 of 1985) a merchant shall
pay every year 1% of his total annual sales proceeds to The
Kerala Fisherman Workers Welfare Fund Board. As per the
decision of the constitutional bench of The Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Civil Appeal No. 12788 of 1996 it was held that the
state legislature has no power to make law on the subject
and therefore the above said provision was rendered
unconstitutional. The Hon'ble court has held that there is no
nexus between the contributor and the beneficiary since
there is no employer employee relationship between them
and therefore the levy could not be imposed or realized from
the purchaser/exporter. Consequently The Government
could not levy from the purchaser of fish or the exporter the
required cess and therefore the welfare fund board has lost
it's financial stability.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
The government has examined the matter and in order
to augment the funds of the The Kerala Fishermens Welfare
Fund Board it was decided to impose half percent cess on the
turnover of fish and fish products and to realize the same
from the traders.
Even though a bill numbered as 287 was introduced
during the 11 Legislative Assembly due to want of time it
could not be enacted.
Since the Kerala State Legislature was not in session,
and since the directives were to be enforced immediately The
Governor of Kerala promulgated an ordinance The Kerala
Fisherman and Allied Workers Welfare Fund Cess Ordinance
dated 07.01.2006 and the same was published as Ordinance
No. 8 of 2006 in the extra ordinary gazette No. 46 dated
07.01.2006.
Even though a bill was introduced to replace the
ordinance with an act the same could not be introduced or
passed during the assembly session commencing from
03.02.2006 and ending on 21.02.2006 and further
commencing from 14.03.2006 and terminating on
15.03.2006. The ordinance was re- promulgated on
17.03.2006 as The Kerala Fisherman and Allied Workers
Welfare Fund Cess Ordinance (28 of 2006) and the same was
published in the extra ordinary gazette No. 604 dated
17.03.2006.
Even though a bill was introduced to replace the
ordinance with an act the same could not be introduced or
passed during the assembly session commencing from
24.05.2006 and ending on 30.06.2006. The Governor again
re- promulgated The Kerala Fisherman and Allied Workers
Welfare Fund Cess Ordinance 2006 (37 of 2006) and the
same was published in the extra ordinary gazette No. 1131
dated 05.07.2006.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
Even though a bill was introduced to replace the
ordinance with an act the same could not be introduced or
passed during the assembly session commencing from
18.09.2006 and ending on 26.10.2006. The Governor has
again re- promulgated The Kerala Fisherman and Allied
Workers Welfare Fund Cess Ordinance 2006 (57 of 2006) and
the same was published in the extra ordinary gazette No.
1721 dated 30.10.2006.
This bill is intended to enact a legislation replacing the
said ordinance."
8. The rationale of the Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Fund
Act, 1985, as well as 2007 Act as far as the welfare of the
fishermen is concerned remained the same. It is in that context,
Assessing Officer sent individual notices to the exporters, giving
cause to assail legislative competence with a declaration that
exporters, in view of the judgment in Koluthara Exports
(supra) are not exigible to pay cess approached this Court.
State contested the aforementioned writ petitions and in
principle had taken a stand that there is a stark difference
between the previous Act as well as 2007 Act as expression
"contribution" no longer exists/subsists and has been replaced
with the expression "cess" which as per the catena of judgments
would also include "tax" or "fee".
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
9. Learned Single Bench on appreciation of
materials/documents and the case law cited, allowed the writ
petitions and declared that the Act 2007 would not be applicable
to the exporters, for, the State did not have the legislative
competence to introduce Sections 3(1), 3(2) and 3(3) of the
2007 Act. It is in that background, intra court appeals have
been filed.
10. Mr.Rafeeq, learned Sr. Government Pleader on behalf
of the State and in support of the memorandum of appeal raised
the following submissions:
(i) The 2007 Act has been enacted to levy cess on sale
proceeds of fish, fish products, allied objects and equipment
within the State with a view to augment resources to the Kerala
Fishermen's Welfare Fund constituted under the Fishermen's
Welfare Fund Act, 1985, to safeguard the welfare of the
fishermen and allied workers of fisheries industries in the State.
(ii) The Supreme Court in Koluthara Export (supra)
held that though the State can justify the Act under Entry 23 of
List III but it cannot impost levy in the nature of "contribution"
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
payable by the exporters. The 2007 Act do not envisage any
liability imposed upon the "exporters" qua "contribution", thus,
the ratio decidendi culled out in the Koluthara Export was/is
not applicable in the context of levy of cess.
(iii) The impost in the nature of employees contribution
as envisaged in the 1985 Act and levy of "cess" under 2007 Act
are not in pari materia but are quiet different and thus the
petitioners cannot be permitted to contest that there was no
employer and employee relationship.
(iv) The Unique feature of the cess is that it is a
compulsory levy meant to raise revenue for a specific purpose.
The presence of quid pro quo is not always sine qua non for a
cess. The cess was introduced by taking aid of Entry 58 of List II
of Seventh Schedule. The said entry for clarity deals with the
Taxes on "animals and boats". Fish would also be an animal, in
view of ratio decidendi culled out in ITC Ltd. v. Person in
charge, Agricultural Market Committee, Kakinada and
others [2004) 2 SCC 794]. The said findings came to be passed
by taking into consideration definition of fish in Section 2(b) of
Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
Vessels) Act, 1981 and it was held that in a common parlance,
animal is understood as a quadruped creature but fish is also an
animal but of a different kind. So it has also essential attributes
of an animal because of the life, sensation and voluntary
motion.
(v) The Learned Single Bench ought not to have tested
the legislative competence of the State in promulgating 2007
Act by striking out the aforementioned provisions as many other
entities/persons falling under the definition of Dealer have also
be given a benefit.
(vi) The law with regard to charging of cess, which have
trappings of tax or a fee, is no longer res integra in view of the
judgment of Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v.
Kesoram Industries Ltd. And Others [2004 (10) SCC 201]
wherein paragraph 142 by taking into reference of the facts of
the case as well as the definition of cess, it has been held that
the State is not denuded from levying cess by way of tax so as
to generate its funds. Though it may be termed as cess on a
particular item like mineral, in that case, but the impact thereof
falls on the land delivering the minerals.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
(vii) It would also mean an assessment or levy.
Availability of indirect benefit and a general nexus between the
person bearing the burden of levy of fee and the services
rendered out of the fee collected is enough to uphold the validity
of fee charged and therefore cannot be construed to be a tax on
a tax.
11. Per contra Sri.S.Muralidhar, learned Senior counsel
assisted by Sri. Premjith Nagendran countered the arguments of
Mr.Rafeeq, the Learned Government Pleader, summarized their
submissions, in the following manner:
(i). The definition of 'dealer' in the 1985 Act viz,
Ordinance was/is identical. The State after having considered
the representation Ext.P3 had taken the conscious decision in
not including 'exporters' for the purpose of levy of cess which
would be seen from the definition of 'dealer' in Section 2(d) of
2007 Act. Similarly the definition of "Sale proceeds" had
undergone some change, as was intended to be done by way of
Ordinance. So far so there was no grievance, but the cause of
action accrued on receipt of the notice by an Assessing Officer.
It is in that background, the legislative competence was assailed
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
in this Court.
(ii) It is not a case were the exporters are not paying
applicable taxes but have been taking care of the employees
under various Central and State legislation much less the
interest of the fishermen has also been protected in view of the
Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Societies Act, 1980. Provisions of
Section 27 of the Societies Act, 1980, casts duty on the society
in case of an accident to the member or their families, regarding
the relief of payment as well as in case of incapacity and
disability has been taken care of.
(iii) State had not come out with different object by
bringing 2007 Act which in fact is similar to that of 1985 Act. In
fact, the purpose of levying cess was to 'contribute' to the funds
under Section 2(h) defined in 2007 Act, which would mean
Kerala Fisher men's Welfare Fund established under Section 3 of
the Kerala Fishermen Welfare Act, 1985.
(iv) Similarly Section 3 provides for levy and collection of
cess for the purpose of 1985 Act and the cess was also charged
under the scheme framed thereunder ie., 1% total Sales
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
proceeds of dealer in a financial year. There was no dispute with
regard to the definition of 'Dealer' as provided under 2007 Act.
But when the officers at helm of affairs gave a different
meaning/connotation befitting the intent of the State to bring
back the levy/contribution which was sought to be achieved by
1985 Act despite being not successful as per the ratio in
Koluthara.
(v) Article 286 of the Constitution of India imposes a
restriction on a State vis-a-vis the imposition of tax on sale and
purchase of the goods meant for import of the goods into,
export of the goods out of the territory of India. In other words,
it was submitted that the legislative competence was that of
'Central' and not of the 'State'. In support of the contention
relied upon two judgments in M/s.Sterling Foods v. The
State of Karnataka and Another [63 STC 239] and State of
Karnataka v. Azad Coach Builders Pvt.Ltd. And Another
[(2010) 36 VST 1 (SC)]. The question involved in the cited
judgment was also with regard to Export of Seafood and State,
as per the provisions of Section 5 of the Karnataka Sales Tax
Act, 1957, had imposed tax on such items. By noticing the
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
aforementioned provisions, the demand raised by the
commissioner of tax on raw shrimps, prawns and lobsters meant
for export was held to be not included in the taxable turn over
of the said assessees. Similarly in the other cited judgment in
State of Karnataka, Karnataka sales tax had attempted to
impose a tax upon a builder indulging into fabrication of the
imported chassis brought into India. It was held to be also not
within the domain of the State.
(vi) By virtue of 2007 amendment "allied workers" would
mean a person who is engaged mainly in fishery related
activities for his livelihood and those do not come under the
definition of term 'fishermen' in Clause (e) of Section 2 of 1980
Societies Act but also includes beach workers, fish distributors,
fish curers, peeling workers and processing plant workers who
are not members or not eligible to get membership any other
Statutory Welfare Scheme.
12. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and appraised the paper book.
13. Dealing with the questions, noticed above, it would
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
be useful to extract the definitions of 'dealers', 'sale proceeds'
and 'allied workers' provided in 1985 Act, Ordinance and 2007
Act, for a comparison:
The Kerala The Kerala Fishermen's The Kerala
Fishermen Welfare Allied Workers Welfare Fishermen's Allied
Fund Act 1985 Ordinance 2006. Workers Welfare
Cess Act 2007
Long Title: An Act Long Title: An Long Title: An
to provide for the Ordinance to provide for Act to provide for
constitution of a the levy and collection the levy and
Welfare Fund for of cess on the sale of collection of cess
promoting the proceeds of fish and fish on the sale of
Welfare of products with a view to proceeds of fish,
Fishermen in the augmenting resources of fish products
State of Kerala & the Kerala Fishermen's allied objects and
for matters Welfare Fund constituted equipments within
incidental thereto under Section 3 of the the State with a
Kerela Fishermen's view to
Welfare Fund Act 1985 augmenting
(30 of 1985) resources of the
Kerala
Fishermen's
Welfare Fund
constituted under
Section 3 of the
Kerela
Fishermen's
Welfare Fund Act
1985 (30 of 1985)
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
Definitions Definitions Definitions
Section 2(a) Allied Section 2(a) Allied Section 2(a) Allied
Workers Workers Workers
Allied Worker Allied Worker means Allied Worker
means any person any person who is means any
who is engaged engaged mainly in person who is
mainly in fishery fishery related activities engaged mainly
related activities for for his livelihood and in fishery related
his livelihood and who does not come activities for his
who does not come under the definition of livelihood and
under the definition the term fishermen' in who does not
of the term clause (e) of Section 2 come under the
fisherman in clause of the Kerala definition of the
(e) of Section 2 of Fishermen's Welfare term 'fishermen
the Kerala Societies Act 1980(7 of in clause (e) of
Fishermen's Welfare 1981) and includes Section 2 of the
Societies Act 1980 beach workers, small Kerala
(7 of 1981) and scale fish distributors, Fishermen's
includes beach fish curers, peeling Welfare Societies
workers, small scale workers and processing Act 1980 (7 of
fish distributors, plant workers who are 1981) and
fish curers, peeling not members or not includes beach
workers and small eligible to get workers. fish
scale processing membership, in any distributors, fish
plant workers, who other statutory welfare curers, peeling
are not members or scheme. workers and
not eligible to get processing plant
membership, in any workers who are
statutory welfare not members or
scheme. not eligible to get
membership, in
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
any other
statutory welfare
scheme.
Section 2(d) Dealer Section 2(d) 'Dealer' Section 2(d) Dealer'
Dealer means any Dealer means any Dealer means any
person who carries person who carries on, person who
on within the State within the State the engages in the
of Kerala the business of buying and business of buying
business of buying selling fish or processing and selling of fish
or selling or fish or exporting fish (in or processing fish
processing fish or raw or in processed or bringing into
exporting fish (in form) or fish products the State or
raw or in processed and includes, - sending outside
form) or fish the State the fish (
products and raw or processed)
includes, or fish products or
allied objects or
equipments and
includes. -
(i) a commission (i) a commission agent, (i) a commission
agent, a broker a broker or any other agent, a broker,
or any other mercantile agent; by auctioneer or
mercantile whatever name any other
agent; by called; and mercantile
whatever name agent; by
called; and whatever name
called; and
(ii) a non-resident (ii) a non-resident dealer (ii) a non-resident
dealer or an or an agent of a non- dealer or an
agent of a non- resident dealer or a agent of a non-
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
resident dealer local branch of a firm resident dealer
or a local branch or company or or a branch of
of a firm or association situated a firm or
company or outside the State company or
association association
situated outside situated
the State of outside the
Kerala State
Provided that,
fishermen and
allied worker
as defined in
the Kerala
Fishermen's
Welfare Fund
Act, 1985(30
of 1985) shall
not be
included in
this
Section 2(jd) Sale Section 2(k) Sale Section 2(k) Sale
Proceeds Proceeds Proceeds
Sale Proceeds Sale proceeds means the Sale proceeds
means the amount amount of sale value of means the sale
realized or is likely fish sold in or from the value of all
to be realized by State (including export transactions
sale of fish or fish and transfer of goods carried out in the
products from the State to outside State including
the State for sale or to buying or selling,
process otherwise; bringing in or
Explanation - In the sending outside the
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
case of transfer outside State fish or fish
the State, the sale products or allied
value shall be the actual objects or
value of goods equipments for use
transferred, calculated or for processing
on the basis of the rate otherwise sold in or
prevailing in the State from the State,
14. On perusal of the above, it is evident that the
legislature, while promulgating Ordinance had again, despite the
fact that previous legislation by virtue of 1985 Act has been held
to be without competence for imposing of contribution upon the
exporters, intended to include the name of the exporters. But on
receipt of representation Ext.P3, extracted above, took a
conscious decision not to include the exporters while
promulgating 2007 Act. But on minute perusal of definition of
sale proceeds under Section 2(k), sale proceeds means sale
value of all transactions carried out in the State including
buying or selling, bringing in or sending outside the State,
fish or a fish products or allied objects or equipments for
use or for processing otherwise sold in or from the State,
reflects intent to overcome the finding in previous
judgment qua legislative competence having declared
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
ultravires, again attempted to bring in the 'exporters'. Section 3
incorporated in the 2007 Act envisages levy and collection of
cess for the purpose of Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Fund Act
1985 at one percent (1%) of the total sale proceeds of a dealer
in the financial year. The same reads as under:
3. Levy and Collection of Cess. -(1) There shall be
levied and collected a cess for the purpose of the Kerala
Fishermen Welfare Fund Act, 1985 and the scheme
thereunder, at one percent of the total sale proceeds of a
dealer in a financial year.
(2) The cess levied under sub-section (1) shall be
collected from every dealer in such manner and at such time,
as may be prescribed.
(3) The cess levied under sub- section (1) shall be in
addition to any cess, duty or tax leviable on fish under any
law for the time being in force.
(4) The proceeds of the cess collected under sub-
section (2) shall be credited initially to the Consolidated Fund
of the State in the manner, as may be prescribed.
(5) The amount of cess collected shall be paid to the
Fund of the Board by the Government after deducting the
cost of collection of such cess not exceeding one percent of
the amount collected every year, before 30th June, in the
manner as may be prescribed.
14. As noticed above, the State had, earlier, for the
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
purpose of bringing succor to the fishermen intended to impose
one percent (1%) of contribution upon the various dealers
including the exporters and promulgated 1985 Act for imposing
of the contributions which was though affirmed by the High
Court but held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in
Koluthara (supra). Paragraphs 18 to 23 of the aforementioned
judgment reads as under:
18. Now adverting to the constitutional validity of
the impugned provisions, it must be remembered that Part
IV of the Constitution contains, as noticed above,
fundamental principles in governance of the country. They
indicate and determine the direction for the State but they
are not legislative heads or the fields of legislation like the
Entries in the Lists I, II and III of the Seventh Schedule of
the Constitution. When any statute of a State or any
provision therein is questioned on the ground of lack of
legislative competence, the State cannot claim legitimacy for
enacting the impugned provisions with reference to the
provisions in Part IV of the Constitution; the legislative
competence must be demonstrated with reference to one or
more of the Entries in Lists II and III of the Seventh
Schedule of the Constitution. It is stated that the legislative
competence is referable to Entry 23 of the Concurrent List,
which may be extracted here :
"List III - Concurrent List -
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
23. Social security and social insurance; employment and
unemployment."
There can be no doubt that Entry 23 enables the State
Legislature to enact a law in respect of social security and
social insurance or dealing with employment and
unemployment. The provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 3
of the Act (quoted above) postulate social security and
welfare measures for the fishermen. The State can,
therefore, justify its competence under this Entry. But, in
our view, the State cannot, in an Act under Entry 23 of List
III, place the burden of an impost by way of contribution for
giving effect to the Act and the scheme made thereunder for
the social security and social welfare of a section of society
upon a person who is not a member of such section of
society nor an employer of a person who is a member of
such section of society. The burden of the impost may be
placed only when there exists the relationship of employer
and employee between the contributor and the beneficiary of
the provisions of the Act and the scheme made thereunder.
19. The validity of Employees' State Insurance Act,
1948, in regard to special contribution of the employer under
Chapter V- A of the said Act, was brought under challenge in
appeal before a three-judge Bench of this Court in Gasket
Radiators (supra). The Court held that the payment of
contribution by an employer towards the premium of an
employee's compulsory insurance under the Employees' State
Insurance Act fell directly under Entries 23 and 24 of List III.
It was also held that the contributions under the Act or
contributions to provident fund or payments of other
benefits to workers are neither taxes nor fees and that they
fall within the ambit of Entries 23 and 24 of List III. We are
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
in agreement with the observations of Chinnappa Reddy, J.
who speaking for the Court observed :
"In our understanding, Entries 23 and 24 of List III, of their
own force, empower Parliament or the Legislature of a State
to direct the payment by an employer of contributions of the
nature of those contemplated by the Employees' State
Insurance Act for the benefit of the employees."
20. In Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works (supra), the
constitutional validity of Sections 3, 4, 2(g), 2(g)(h), 2(m),
26, 27 and 31 of the Beedi and Cigar Workers (Condition of
Employment) Act, 1966 was assailed on the ground of lack of
legislative competence in the Parliament to enact such a law.
Having noticed the special feature of the industry of
manufacture of beedi through various categories of workers,
the said Act was passed by the Parliament to provide for the
welfare of workers in beedi and cigar establishments and to
regulate the conditions of their work and for matters
connected therewith. A Constitution Bench of this Court held
that having regard to the true nature and character of the
legislation meant for enforcing better conditions of labour
amongst those who are engaged in the manufacture of
beedis and cigars, the said Act, in pith and substance, was
for welfare of the labour falling within Entries 22, 23 and 24
of List III. It was pointed out that the said Act had fastened
liability on the person who himself engaged labour or the
person for whom or on whose behalf labour was engaged or
the person who had ultimate control over the affairs of the
establishment by reason of advancement of money or of
substantial interest in the control of the affairs of the
establishment. Thus, it is clear that in that case the
impugned legislation, while creating welfare scheme for beedi
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
workers, levied impost by way of contributions on the
employer or a person in the position of an employer.
21. In Regional Executive Kerala Fishermen's Welfare
Fund Board (supra), the question before this Court was
whether exporters of fish meat, carrying on business of
buying processed fish and exporting the same, fell within the
meaning of 'dealer' under Section 4(2) of the Act. The
legislative competence of the State Legislature and the
constitutional validity of Section 4(2) of the Act did not arise
for the consideration of the Court in that case. That case,
therefore, does not advance the case of the respondents.
22. In the instant case, the only nexus between the
categories of persons covered by the sweep of sub-section
(d) of Section 2 of the Act, including the appellant, who carry
on the business of buying or selling or processing fish or
exporting fish (in raw or processed form) or fish products,
including - (i) a commission agent, a broker or any other
mercantile agent, by whatever name called, and (ii) a non-
resident dealer or an agent or a non- resident dealer or a
local branch of a firm or company or association situated
outside the State of Kerala and the beneficiaries under the
Act and the scheme - the fishermen - is that the former are
the purchasers and the latter are the catchers and sellers of
fish. Such a nexus, in our view, is not sufficient to burden a
purchaser/exporter with the impost or levy of the
contribution under Section 4(2) of the Act, which will clearly be
outside the ambit of Entry 23 of List III of the Constitution
and, therefore, lacking legislative competence.
23. For these reasons, Section 4(2) of the Act is
declared to be unconstitutional. Consequently, the order
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
under challenge is set aside. The writ petition shall stand
allowed to that extent."
15. On perusal of the extracted paragraphs of the
judgment in Koluthara (supra), it is evident that the intention
of the State to impose or levy of the contribution under the
erstwhile Section 4(2) of the Act was held to be outside the
ambit of Entry 23 of List III of the Constitution of India on
account of lacking legislative competence primarily on the
ground that there was no nexus or relationship of an employer
and employee between the catchers of fish and exporters. There
is no dispute to the ratio decidendi that the State has the power
or legislative competence to impose levy but what has been
already held to be illegal cannot be undone by incorporation of
the new Act of 2007 by changing the nomenclature of
'contribution' to 'levy'. For the sake of repetition, the definition
of 'dealer' in the Ordinance included exporter, the words
'exporting fish (in raw or in processed form)' has been replaced
in the Act with the words 'bringing into the State or sending
outside the State the fish'. Similarly the definition of 'dealer' in
the Welfare Fund Act as well as Cess Act are also identical
except for a mild change. The fishermen form a class engaged
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
in catching fish, while exporter is an ultimate purchaser. It
cannot be disputed that fish is initially caught by the fishermen,
thereafter, being sold to various intermediaries before it
ultimately reaches the hands of the exporter; in between there
are many sellers, retailers, agents and processors. Therefore, it
cannot be held to be sufficient to burden the exporter with
liability to make contributions to Fishermen's Welfare Fund in
the absence of any relationship of employer and employee. It is
not the case of the State that there had been relationship of
employer-employee between the exporter and fishermen owing
to 2007 Act. Once the Supreme Court found in Koluthara
(supra) that the State has no power, the subsequent enactment
is a faint attempt to charge very same contribution at the same
very rate, of one percent (1%) of the sale proceeds of exporters
under the different nomenclature 'cess'. For justifying the levy
of 'cess' there has to be a relationship of an employer and
employee between exporter who is an ultimate purchaser and
the fisherman. Thus, the stand of the State in our considered
view had not been consistent regarding the nature of the
import.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
16. In the present case contribution is sought to be
extracted from the respondent - petitioners neither as a tax or
a fee but as a 'cess', but it does not have characteristics of a
tax. Though tax is a levy that is imposed for general purpose,
but in the instant matter, the levy is being imposed not for
general purpose, but for the benefit and to subserve the cause
of the fishermen. Comparison of the definitions of expressions
'dealer' and 'sale proceeds' prima facie shows that they are
similarly worded. A feeble attempt has been made to satisfy the
conscious of this Court by contending that the present
enactment has been made to say cess is different to
contribution. This argument does not merit acceptance as the
only change in the previous Act and the present Act is, instead
of 'contribution' nomenclature has been given as that of 'levy'.
17. Levy, no doubt can be also considered as a tax but
in the present case levy is described as 'cess'. The expression
'exporter' has been consciously omitted on receipt of the
representation of the dealers whereby the State taken a
decision in not including the exporters for the purpose of levy
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
but the authorities at the helm of affairs issued notices for
recovery of cess giving cause to the exporters to assail by
bringing them under the expression "bringing into State or
sending outside State the fish (raw or processed)". A similar
controversy arose in the Supreme Court in M/s. Sterling v.
State of Kerala [63 STC 239]. In the aforementioned case,
challenge was laid to impost of a tax as per the provisions of
Section 5 (3) of Central Sales Act, 1956 on the goods which
were purchased by an assesee for the purpose of complying
with the agreement or order or in relation to export and for
that purpose had been purchasing raw or the processed fish.
Even though, after making the said purchase the exporter
subjected them to process of cutting heads and tales, peeling,
cleaning and freezing before the export. In a sense the goods
remain in commercial parlance after processing and freezing
remain the same. By noticing the aforementioned activity, it
was held that the purchase of raw shrimps, prawns and lobsters
were exempted from purchase tax under Section 5(3) of the
Central Sale Tax Act.
18. In State of Karnataka v. Azad Coach Builders
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
Pvt. Ltd. [(2010) 36 VST 1 (SC)] exporter in respect of a sale
in the course of exports was also brought under the ambit of
provisions of Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act. In the
aforementioned case a local manufacture of the goods sought
exemption from the purview of provisions of sub section 3 of
Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act on the ground that the
penultimate sale of the goods effected in favour of the exporter
was inextricably connected with the export of goods outside the
territory of India. He was a manufacturer and seller of bus
bodies in the State of Karnataka whereas another party was an
exporter and manufacturer of chassis of motor vehicles. On
receipt of the orders from the foreign buyers for the buses, the
exporter in turn placed orders upon the manufacturer and seller
of bus bodies to be fitted on the chassis supplied by it. The
buses were then exported by the exporter. The State brought
the activity under the provisions of the aforementioned Act and
imposed tax, but on analysis of the transaction, court held that
the transaction between the exporter and foreign buyer was
inextricably connected with each other and therefore, the
provisions the Act had no applicability.
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
19. Article 286 of the Constitution of India argued on
behalf of Sri.S.Muralidhar has also a direct role to play with
regard to the legislative competency of the State to impose
'cess' on the exporters. The same reads as under:
286. Restrictions as to imposition of tax on the sale or
purchase of goods- (1) No law of a State shall impose, or
authorise the imposition of, a tax on the sale or purchase of
goods where such sale or purchase takes place.-
(a)outside the State; or
(b)in the course of the import of the goods into, or
export of the goods out of, the territory of India.
[***]
(2) Parliament may by law formulate principles for
determining when a sale or purchase of goods takes place in
any of the ways mentioned in clause (1)."
20. on perusal of the aforementioned Article, it is evident
that the power to impose a tax on such type of transaction only
vests with the Central and not with the State. The State has
failed to overcome the hurdle qua applicability of Article 286 of
the Constitution of India, probably for the reason that there is
no direct relationship of employer and employee. The intention
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
for promulgating the welfare fund was to uplift the fisherman.
Workers working in the processing plants owned by the
exporters would not fall within the definition of fisherman for
subjecting of cess.
21. Though the Single Bench in the penultimate
paragraph of the judgment declared that Section 3(1), 3(2) and
3(3) of the Act are beyond the legislative competence and set
aside the provisions, we are of the view that instead of setting
aside the provisions, it should have been construed that the said
provisions would not be applicable to the exporters- respondent
- writ petitioners. With the aforementioned modifications, we
uphold the remaining findings. Writ appeals stand dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
C.S. SUDHA
JUDGE
nak
WA NO.987/2019 & Conn. Cases
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25/02/2019
IN THE CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL)
NO.256/2019.
