Naveen Mathew Philip vs. State Of Kerala

Facts

The petitioner, Naveen Mathew Philip, proprietor of Philips Grano Products, filed a writ petition seeking a direction against respondents 1 to 6 (State of Kerala and various revenue and administrative officials) to refrain from harassing him by compelling him to sell his products at a price fixed by the respondents without legal authority. He also sought to prevent vindictive action for not selling his products at pre-revised rates. The petitioner was represented by Sri. Cherian Gee Varghese, and the respondents were represented by the learned Government Pleader, Smt. Princy Xavier.

Held

The Court recorded the submission made by the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 6. The submission stated that the respondents have not harassed the petitioner, nor directed him to sell his products at any fixed price, and that no vindictive action is being taken against him. The respondents further submitted that if the petitioner functions in accordance with the provisions of law, no harassment will be meted out to him. Based on this submission, the writ petition was closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents have harassed the petitioner by compelling him to sell his products at a price fixed by them without the authority of law, and whether vindictive action is being taken against him for not selling his products at pre-revised rates, as alleged by the petitioner? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner alleged harassment and compulsion to sell products at arbitrarily fixed prices, fearing vindictive action. Respondents' Argument: The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the respondents have not harassed the petitioner, nor directed him to sell products at any fixed price, and no vindictive action is being taken. They stated that if the petitioner functions in accordance with law, no harassment will occur.