Skip to content


R. Raman Unnithan Vs. State of Kerala and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKerala High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Appeal No. 51 of 1968
Judge
Reported inAIR1969Ker243
ActsConstitution of India - Article 226; Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958 - Sections 7 and 12
AppellantR. Raman Unnithan
RespondentState of Kerala and ors.
Appellant Advocate K. Velayudhan Nair,; V.S. Moothathu,; N.R.K. Nair,;
Respondent AdvocateAdv. General
DispositionAppeal allowed
Excerpt:
- .....quilon, on 15-10-1967 stating that the government of kerala have stayed the working of the mill until further orders. in view of ex. p-l, the sub divisional officer, electrical sub division, punalur, issued ext. p-2 informing the petitioner that the district collector quilon has issued directions to him to discontinue the electrical supply to the petitioner's rice mill. the original petition was filed to quash exts. p-l and p-2. the learned judge dismissed the petition holding that ext. p-l is an interim order and it is open to the petitioner to move the government for vacating ext. p-l.3. we are of the view that the order of the learned single judge has to be set aside on the ground that there is no power vested in the government under the rice milling industry regulation act,.....
Judgment:

Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J.

1 Though this writ appeal was referred to a Full Bench along with W. A. Nos. 260 and 261 of 1967, the question to be decided is not the same as in those appeals.

2. The appellant Is conducting a rice mill at Pattazhi, having obtained a licence under the Rice Milling Industry Regulation Act, 1958. The licence is valid until 31-3-1968. Ex. P-l order was served upon the petitioner by the District Collector, Quilon, on 15-10-1967 stating that the Government of Kerala have stayed the working of the mill until further orders. In view of Ex. P-l, the Sub Divisional Officer, Electrical Sub Division, Punalur, issued Ext. P-2 informing the petitioner that the District Collector Quilon has issued directions to him to discontinue the electrical supply to the petitioner's rice mill. The Original Petition was filed to quash Exts. P-l and P-2. The learned Judge dismissed the petition holding that Ext. P-l is an interim order and it is open to the petitioner to move the Government for vacating Ext. P-l.

3. We are of the view that the order of the learned single Judge has to be set aside on the ground that there is no power vested in the Government under the Rice Milling Industry Regulation Act, 1958, to stay the operation of Ext. P-l. Exts. P-l and P-2 have therefore, to be quashed even though the period of the licence expired on 31-3-1968.

4. We therefore set aside the decisionand allow the appeal. We make noorder as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //