P.J. Sebastian and Santhakumaran K v State of Kerala and Others
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Amit Rawal
- Judgment Date
- 2022-11-04
- Court Decision / Holding
- Disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to take a decision on Ext.P2 dated 25.10.2022 in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or their representatives and the license holder, and to pass orders within 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.
- Final Disposition
- Writ petition disposed with directions to consider Ext.P2 in accordance with law after due hearing, within 15 days of receipt of certified copy of the judgment.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- P.J.SEBASTIAN
- SANTHAKUMARAN K
Respondents
- STATE OF KERALA represented by the Secretary to Government, Taxes (A) Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram-695033
- THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, EXCISE HEAD QUARTERS, NANDAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033
- THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003
- THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, CHEMBUKKAVU P.O, THRISSUR-680005
- THE MULAGUNNATHUKAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MULANGUNNATHUKAVU, KILANNUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680581, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
- KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING & MARKETING) CORPORATION LTD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BEVCO TOWER, VIKAS BHAVAN, PALAYAM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033
- THE MANAGER, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING & MARKETING) CORPORATION LTD, FL-1 SHOP NO.8013, VELAPPAYA ROAD DESOM, KILANNUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680596
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • SEBIN SEBASTIAN
Counsels for Respondents
- • SHEEJO CHACKO
- • SHEENAMOL VARGHESE
- • SRI T NAVEEN SC GP
- • SRI GIMMY GEORGE
Case Synopsis & Summary
The petitioners, senior citizens including a physically challenged first petitioner, challenge the relocation of Foreign Liquor (FL-1) shop No. 8013 of the Kerala State Beverages Corporation to premises 82A and 82B in Ward II, Mulangunnathukavu Gram Panchayath, Velappaya Road, Kilannur, Thrissur. They allege the shop is operating without a D&O license (from the 5th respondent, Mulangunnathukavu Gram Panchayath) and its location in a residential area adversely affects peaceful living. They contend that Section 232 of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act requires a D&O license and that Rule 39 of the Foreign Liquor Rules contemplates cancellation of licenses in objectionable areas. They rely on Ganapathy Iyer v State of Kerala and Others (2018) to argue that the Excise Commissioner can order closure under Disposal Rules and Foreign Liquor Rules in the public interest, and invoke the privacy principles from Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India. The court, noting the petitions largely touch public interest, declines to address the merits here and directs the respondents to consider Ext.P2 after hearing, within 15 days of receiving a certified copy of the judgment.
Provisions of Law Cited
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Right to privacy is a constitutionally protected fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
- Public interest petitions cannot be entertained by this court in the present context.
- Under Disposal Rules and Foreign Liquor Rules, the Excise Commissioner can order closure of a foreign liquor shop in the interest of public peace or morality or on grounds of expediency (as articulated in Ganapathy Iyer v State of Kerala and Others).
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners contend that FL-1 shop No. 8013 has been shifted from Thrissur Corporation to Mulangunnathukavu without a valid D&O license from the 5th respondent Gram Panchayath, violating Section 232 of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act and Rule 39 of the Foreign Liquor Rules, making the licence liable to cancellation. They rely on Ganapathy Iyer v State of Kerala and Others to support closure under Disposal Rules and Foreign Liquor Rules for public peace/morality and on the privacy principles from Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India, arguing privacy and dignity of residents. They seek to shift the shop to an unobjectionable distant location and stop the present operation.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents contended that the matter involves regulatory considerations and public interest; the court should balance regulatory compliance, due process, and local concerns. They rely on the statutory framework and representations (Ext. P1, P2) and request that the authorities determine the issue under law, with opportunity for hearing, rather than granting blanket relief at this stage.
Cited Precedents (2)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ganapathy Iyer and Others v. State of Kerala and Others | 2018 (2) KHC 698 | Positive | Used to support that the Excise Commissioner can order closure of a foreign liquor shop under Disposal Rules and Foreign Liquor Rules in the interest of public peace or morality or on grounds of expediency. |
| Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union Of India | 2017 10 SCC 1 | Positive | Cited to establish that privacy is a constitutionally protected fundamental right under Articles 14, 19, and 21. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against P.J. Sebastian and Santhakumaran K v State of Kerala and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.