Cost Of Establishment Payable To Govt By Private Distilleries For Deploying Exercise Officials Is Full Pay Under Service Rules: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court allowed Writ Appeals preferred against the private distilleries engaged in the manufacturing of Indian Made Foreign Liquor.
Justice Anil K. Narendran, Justice Muralee Krishna S., Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court held that the cost of establishment payable to the Government by private distilleries for deploying exercise officials to supervise the manufacturing of liquor and allied activities is the full pay under Rule 53(b) of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules (KSR).
The Court held thus in a batch of Writ Appeals preferred by the State against the private distilleries engaged in the manufacturing of Indian Made Foreign Liquor who sell the same to the Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation.
A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. observed, “… it is clear that the cost of establishment is to be decided by the Government and it is one of the license conditions for granting the privilege of manufacturing intoxicating liquor. The help of State missionaries by deputing its officials was given for availing such privilege, though said officials were deputed for preventing revenue loss also.”
The common issue involved in this case was whether the cost of establishment payable to the Government by the private distilleries for deploying exercise officials to supervise the manufacturing of liquor and allied activities is the full pay and allowances payable to the post of the Officers deployed or only the charge allowance payable under Rule 53(b) of Part I of the KSR since the Officers deployed were holding only additional charge.
Government Pleader Vinitha. B represented the Appellants while Advocate Raju K. Mathews represented the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The Respondents were the private distilleries engaged in the manufacturing of Indian Made Foreign Liquor and they filed the respective Writ Petitions raising a grievance that even though the Inspectors deputed to supervise the activities of the distilleries were holding only additional charge, the Excise Commissioner collected full pay and allowances payable to the post of Excise Inspector from them. In the said Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Respondents sought a Writ of Mandamus.
They sought directions to the Appellants to recompute the amount payable by them by way of cost of establishment for the period mentioned in those Petitions, in terms of provisions of Rule 53(b) of Part I of KSR and to refund the amount collected from them in excess of the said amount and other ancillary reliefs. The Single Judge found that in view of Rule 53(b) of Part I of KSR and a previous Judgment, the Appellants are entitled to charge only the additional allowance and not full pay of the persons who were deployed in the distilleries of the Respondents, since they were deputed by giving additional charge of the Excise Inspector of the respective Excise Range. This was challenged before the Division Bench.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the above facts, said, “… it is pertinent to note that there are no permanent cadre posts created for the supervision of the functions of the distilleries. The Officers are deployed by the Government. In such circumstances, the respondents cannot contend that they are liable to pay only the charge allowance payable for the additional duty of an officer deputed to supervise the distilleries.”
The Court, therefore, held that the impugned Judgment passed by the Single Judge does not express the correct position of law and hence, liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Appeals and set aside the impugned Judgment.
Cause Title- State of Kerala & Ors. v. T.R. Vijayakumar (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:33869)
