Renjitha.K.M vs. The Punchayath Secretary - Kerala High Court, 04 November 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 13TH KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) PETITIONER/S: RENJITHA.K.M AGED 34 YEARS D/O.K.S.MURALEEDHARAN, KALLARACKAL HOUSE, MULAVUKADU.P.O, ERNAKULAM, KERALA-682504 BY ADV. R.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE PUNCHAYATH SECRETARY ADIMALI GRAMA PUNCHAYATH, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685561. *2 THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, MARAPPALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 004. *(ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 27.6.2019 IN IA.NO.1/2019) BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN OTHER PRESENT: SRI. MANURAJ K.J-G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) 2 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the tenant of property owned by certain Sri.P.K.Shaji and that she is running a Jack fruit Processing Company therein, on the strength of a valid licence which had been issued by the 1st respondent - Secretary of Adimali Grama Panchayat.

According to the petitioner, after the petitioner leased the afore property, Sri.P.K.Shaji wanted to become her partner and that Ext.P2 partnership deed was thereafter drawn up, but that he was subsequently arraigned in two cases, registered by the Circle Inspector of Exercise, Thiruvananthapuram, under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, numbered as Crime Nos.14/2018 and 19/2018. She says that, in the meanwhile, the Trade Licence with respect to her business expired and that when she applied for its renewal, it was rejected through Ext.P11 proceedings of the Secretary of the Panchayat, informing that the Trade Licence cannot be renewed for her business as long as she continues in the property in question, since they have already been notified by

WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) 3 the Assistant Exercise Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, that it has been attached and frozen under the provisions of Section 68F(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act for short).

The petitioner asserts that Ext.P11 is incompetent in law, since the proceedings under the NDPS Act cannot apply to a property but only to its owner; and that, in any event of the matter, since she is not involved in any of the said cases, she is willing to evict herself from the property as and when action against the property is taken by the competent Authorities under the provisions of the said Act. She, therefore, says that her application be directed to be reconsidered and the Panchayat be ordered to renew the Trade Licence immediately.

The learned Government Pleader - Sri.Manuraj K.J, appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent - Assistant Excise Commissioner, submits that the owner of the property is a notorious offender and that he is involved in several cases apart from the two that have been mentioned by the petitioner in this writ petition. He says that Ext.P10 proceedings have been issued by the Assistant Excise Commissioner invoking the

WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) 4 powers under Section 68F(1) of the NDPS Act and therefore, that the property cannot be used by anyone - including the petitioner - for commercial purposes. He contends that the provisions of the NDPS Act are very clear that properties purchased out of ill-gotten wealth as a result of the nefarious actions under the said Act will have to be frozen and kept ready for confiscation and sale; and consequently, that the petitioner cannot be allowed to continue her business therein. He, therefore, prays that this writ petition be dismissed.

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent - Adimali Grama Panchayat, Sri.Latheesh Sebastian, submits that Ext.P11 has been issued only because Ext.P10 communication had been received by the Secretary of the Panchayat in March, 2019. He says that, as is clear from Ext.P10, the property in question has been attached by the Assistant Excise Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, under the provisions of the NDPS Act and therefore, that the petitioner cannot continue to do her business therein. He says that therefore, through Ext.P11, she was offered renewal of her Trade Licence, provided she is able to shift her business to

WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) 5 another premises. He also, therefore, prays that this writ petition be dismissed.

When I consider the afore submissions and examine the materials on record, there is an additional reason why this Court is incapacitated from granting any relief to the petitioner, which is that Ext.P1 stated to be a lease agreement for a period of ten years, executed on Non Judicial Stamp Paper of Rs.150/- is not a registered document under the provisions of the applicable Statutes and Regulations. Obviously, therefore, Ext.P1 is not a valid document and normally would be amenable to proceedings for impounding and resultant imposition of penalty. Therefore, when the petitioner is thus unable to establish her rights over the property through a proper lease deed, I am certain that any order in this writ petition to direct the 1st respondent - Grama Panchayat to renew her Trade Licence would be improper, if not wholly illegal. This Court cannot, therefore, issue such an order; and in any event of the matter, I do not find Ext.P11 to be in error since the Secretary of the Panchayat is absolutely right in maintaining that a Licence cannot be renewed for a

WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) 6 premises, which is now facing a proceedings under Section 68F(1) of the NDPS Act, particularly, when it is conceded before me that the aforementioned Sri.P.K.Shaji is a repeated offender. In the afore circumstances, I cannot find this writ petition to be maintainable and therefore, dismiss it, however, without making any order as to costs. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN rp JUDGE

WP(C).No.16393 OF 2019(Y) 7 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE LICENSE AGREEMENT DATED 05.10.2016 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED EXECUTED ON 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2017 EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE CONSENT FROM POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD NO.016IDUCTO4498275 ON 16/08/2017 EXHIBIT P4 NOC FROM FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT NO.E/1591/17 ON 30/08/2017 EXHIBIT P5 THE LICENSE OF ADIMALI GRAMMA PUNCHAYATH, LICENSE NO.A5/4485/16 D AND O -2221/2018 ON 28.05.2018 EXHIBIT P6 THE COMMISSIONERATE OF THE FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARDS AUTHORITY (FASSAI) LICENSE NO.11317006000306 EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE SAID GST REGISTRATION EXHIBIT P8 AOF UDYOG AADHAAR NUMBER KL 03B0000863 EXHIBIT P9OF THE RECEIPT OF APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF PUNCHAYATH LICENSE ( D AND O) ON 18TH MAR, 2019 EXHIBIT P10OF THE LETTER DATED 24/03/2019 FROM THE EXCISE OFFICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT P11OF THE REJECTION LETTER OF THE RESPONDENT, DATED 29/04/2019 EXHIBIT P12OF THE OBJECTION DATED 31.01.2019 AGAINST EXCISE COMMISSIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE IST CLASS ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVCANANTHAPURAM.