Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 2208 (KER)

Biji Biju W/o Biju v. D. VS State of Kerala

2025-08-18

N.NAGARESH

body2025
JUDGMENT : N. NAGARESH, J. 1. The petitioner, who is licensee of Akshaya E Centre-EKM-177 at Kunnukara in Kunnukara Grama Panchayat in Ernakulam District, seeks to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to give a chance to remit the fine and regularise the conduct of the Akshaya Centre. The petitioner states that the Akshaya Centre at Kunnukara was started in the year 2005. Respondents 5 and 6 gave adverse reports in respect of the Centre. Respondents 5 and 6 deliberately obtained complaints from the beneficiaries. 2. The petitioner states that the 7 th respondent approached the petitioner on 16.11.2019 and demanded details of his pension. The 7 th respondent did not pay the charges for mustering. The 7 th respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner alleging levy of charges for mustering work. An enquiry was ordered. But, the copy of the complaint was not served on the petitioner. The District Chief Coordinator and the District Collector imposed a fine of Rs. 5,000/- on the petitioner as per Ext.P5 order dated 23.12.2019. 3. The petitioner filed Ext.P6 appeal. The Director, without considering the grounds urged by the petitioner and relying solely on the report of the District Project Manager, affirmed the penalty order as per Ext.P8. The petitioner filed Ext.P10 representation before the Chief Minister to reconsider the imposing of fine. It was not considered. The Akshaya District Office again issued Ext.P12 demand. 4. On the petitioner's appeal, an online hearing was conducted during October, 2021. The petitioner would submit that the Akshaya Block Cordinator had conducted a search in the Centre of the petitioner and filed Ext.P16 report before the ADM in which it was stated that all the allegations orally made during the hearing were false. However, the licence of the petitioner was cancelled as per Ext.P19. The petitioner objected to cancellation of licence addressing Ext.P20 letter to the District Collector, Ext.P21 letter to the Secretary, IT Mission and Ext.P22 letter to the Director. 5. However, to the surprise of the petitioner, the District Project Officer had invited applications for starting Akshaya Centre at Panchayat Junction, Kunnukara in the place of the Centre of the petitioner. Ext.P25 is illegal and highly arbitrary. The cancellation of the licence granted to the petitioner is liable to be set aside, urged the petitioner. 6. The Government Pleader resisted the writ petition. Ext.P25 is illegal and highly arbitrary. The cancellation of the licence granted to the petitioner is liable to be set aside, urged the petitioner. 6. The Government Pleader resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that complaints were received in respect of functioning of the Akshaya Centre managed by the petitioner. The petitioner levied fees in excess of the permissible limits. The petitioner illegally levied fees even for pension mustering. Due enquiries were made. The statements were taken from the complainants. The respondents were convinced that the petitioner charged excess amounts from the consumers. A fine of Rs. 5,000/- was imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner refused to pay the fine amount. Thereupon, the licence granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner has not advanced any grounds to recall cancellation of the licence granted to the petitioner. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents. 8. One Sri. Devassy submitted a complaint dated 05.12.2019 alleging that unauthorised fee at the rate of Rs. 10/- was levied from person who approached the Akshaya Centre for pension mustering. When reports were sought from the Panchayat, the Secretary to the Panchayat submitted that the Panchyat has not received any complaint regarding levy of fee for mustering. However, on the basis of complaint from the said Devassy alone, the District Collector imposed a fine of Rs. 5,000/- on the petitioner as per Ext.P5 order dated 23.12.2019. 9. The petitioner thereupon submitted Ext.P6 appeal to the appellate authority. A hearing was conducted. The appellate authority passed Ext.P8 order upholding the imposition of penalty. The petitioner was cautioned not to levy such unauthorised fee. When the fine was demanded again as per Ext.P9 intimation dated 08.10.2020, the petitioner submitted Ext.P10 representation to the District Social Welfare Office requesting to waive the penalty imposed on the petitioner. 10. The petitioner was, however, informed that there will be a hearing before cancelling the licence granted to the petitioner for failure to pay the penalty amount. By Ext.P12 order, the petitioner was informed that unless the penalty is paid before 12.07.2021, the licence will be cancelled. On 29.10.2021, the District Collector informed that action can be taken to cancel the licence granted to the petitioner. The Director, Akshaya State Project passed Ext.P19 order on 13.06.2023 cancelling the licence. 11. By Ext.P12 order, the petitioner was informed that unless the penalty is paid before 12.07.2021, the licence will be cancelled. On 29.10.2021, the District Collector informed that action can be taken to cancel the licence granted to the petitioner. The Director, Akshaya State Project passed Ext.P19 order on 13.06.2023 cancelling the licence. 11. By Ext.P20, the petitioner requested one more month's time to pay the penalty. The petitioner submitted Exts.P22 and P23 representations. By Ext.P24, the Administrative Officer informed the petitioner that further complaints are received against the petitioner and therefore the cancellation is justified. 12. A perusal of the pleadings in the writ petition would indicate that the proceedings against the petitioner were initiated on the basis of a complaint dated 05.12.2019 filed by one Sri. Devassy to the effect that the petitioner had levied Rs. 10/- as fees for mustering of pension. Though the District Project Manager of Akshaya made enquiries with the Grama Panchayat in this regard, the Secretary to the Grama Panchayat which scheduled the mustering informed as per Ext.P4 that 3131 beneficiaries have completed the mustering and the Panchayat has not received any complaint regarding the service rendered by the Akshaya Centre. 13. Nevertheless, the District Collector passed Ext.P5 order dated 23.12.2019 imposing Rs. 5,000/- as fine. The petitioner immediately filed Ext.P6 appeal. The appeal was rejected as per Ext.P8 holding that the petitioner does not know as to how to behave to the public. It may be noted that no instance was shown in Ext.P8 order regarding any misbehaviour on the part of the petitioner against the general public. The appellate authority, however, upheld the penalty. The petitioner has been explaining her innocence in the matter by sending repeated representations to the District Social Welfare Office, the Director Akshaya State Project, Secretary to the Government, etc. However, they have not passed any favourable orders. 14. I find that as regards levy of Rs. 10/- from the said Devassy and his wife, the matter was considered by the authorities and the authorities did not deem it necessary to cancel the licence of the petitioner on that allegation. The authorities deemed it fit to impose a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Thereafter, the licence granted to the petitioner was cancelled for the reason that the penalty was not paid by the petitioner. 15. The authorities deemed it fit to impose a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Thereafter, the licence granted to the petitioner was cancelled for the reason that the penalty was not paid by the petitioner. 15. The pleadings would show that after Ext.P5 imposition of penalty on 23.12.2019, the petitioner has been prosecuting her appeal and representations before the appellate authority, District Social Welfare Office, Director, Akshaya State Project, Secretary (IT), Government of Kerala, etc. It is in the meanwhile that the licence was cancelled for non-payment of penalty. 16. Though in the subsequent communications the respondents have stated that further complaints have been received against the petitioner, no specific particulars are available in that regard. The petitioner has not been given notice of such complaint and has not been heard in the matter. No materials are available to show that those alleged complaints are even prima facie true. 17. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is a woman entrepreneur and the established charge against the petitioner is with regard to levy of Rs. 10/- from one Devassy and his wife for executing mustering work and taking into consideration the fact that a penalty of imposition of Rs. 5,000/- as fine proportionate to the gravity of the offence has been imposed on the petitioner, the further action to cancel the licence of the petitioner will be arbitrary, even if there is delay in paying the penalty. As the petitioner has been prosecuting the matter before the competent authorities, I am of the view that the petitioner shall be given a final opportunity to pay the fine and regularise the licence and Akshaya Centre, in the interest of justice. 18. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions: (i) The petitioner is directed to pay the penalty amount of Rs. 5,000/- within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. (ii) If the petitioner pays Rs. 5,000/- within two weeks, Ext.P19 order cancelling the licence of the Akshaya Centre of the petitioner will stand set aside. (iii) If the petitioner remits the fine as directed above, the licence in respect of the petitioner's Akshaya Centre shall be renewed. (iv) It is made clear that this judgment will not preclude the respondents from initiating any action for subsequent misconduct, if any, on the part of the petitioner.