IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 17868 of 2007(B) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. KURUMANGHATTUPADI KARSHAKA SAMITHI, REG.NO.703/91, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.K.CHANDRAN, KURUMANGHATTUPADI KARSHAKA SAMITHI, PATTIPARAMBU P.O., THIRUVILLAMALA, THRISSUR DIST. 2. P.K.CHANDRAN, S/O KRISHNAN, PUTHANVEETTIL, P.O.PATTIPARAMBA, THIRUVILLAMALA, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 4. AGRICULTURAL ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, KRISHI BAHVAN, PAZHAYANNUR. 5. AGRICULTURE OFFICER, THIRUVILLAMALA. * 6. THE MANAGER, (LORD KRISHNA BANK, P.O.PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR DIST). WPC NO.17868/07 -2- *6. THE MANAGER, (CENTURION BANK OF PUNJAB), P.O. PUHZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR DT. (*THE ADDRESS OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT IS DELETED AND CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 17/3/2008 IN IA NO.3908/08). 6. THE MANAGER, H.D.FC. BANK, P.O. PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR DT. (THE CAUSE TITLEOF WPC IS CORRECTED BY DELETING THE NAME OF THE BANK OF R6 AND ADDING THE NAME AS HDFC BANK AS PER ORDER DATED 5/11/2008 IN IA NO.13770/08. 7. ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY, (MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT) VADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR DIST. ADV. SRI.B.JAYASHANKAR,SC,LORD KRISHNA BANK FOR R6 SRI.M.A.SHAFIK FOR R.1,2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.17868/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT 18.11.2005 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, THRISSUR. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES DT 10.3.2007. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE GENERALBODY MEETING OF THE SAMITHI. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE MANAGER LORD KRISHNA BANK, PAZHAYANNUR BRANCH. EXT.P6: TRUE COPIES OF THE CASH BILL ISSUED BY RAIDCO VADAKANCHERRY BRANCH DT 24.2.2006 IN THE NAME OF PEETITIONER. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DT 5.4.2006. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE BANK. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 7.3.2006. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 18.7.2006. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 5.3.2007 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WITH COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MADE BEFORE THE AGRICULTURAL MINISTER. EXT.P13: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA DT 14.3.2007. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 ADDRESSING RESPONDENT NO.1 DT 29.11.2006. EXT.P16: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 13.3.2007. WPC NO.17868/07 -2- EXT.P17: TRUE COPY OF the ORDER DT 23.3.2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P18: TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE PERTAINING TO THE TRACTOR BEARING NO.KL08/AJ 1195. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 17868 OF 2007 (B) ==================== Dated this the 30th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and the second petitioner is its Secretary. 2. 1st respondent introduced Ext.P3 scheme, enabling registered societies like the first petitioner to acquire tractors for the mechanisation of the agricultural activities of small farmers who constitute the membership of the 1st petitioner. The scheme also provided for payment of a subsidy of 50% of the value of the machinery acquired. 3. Petitioners submit that in order to avail of the benefit of Ext.P3 Scheme, the first petitioner wanted to purchase a tractor and approached the then Lord Krishna Bank, now amalgamated in the 6th respondent, for financial assistance. It is stated that accepting the immovable property offered as security by the 2nd petitioner, Bank extended financial assistance and utilising the same, the first petitioner acquired the tractor, the invoice of which is Ext.P6. 4. Ext.P6 shows that the same is issued in favour of the 2nd petitioner, but however, his capacity as Secretary of the 1st petitioner is indicated in Ext.P6 itself. Petitioners thereafter started their endeavour to WPC 17868/07 :2 : get the subsidy amount released and Exts.P8 to P11 are the letters issued by the Bank requesting the 5th respondent to release the subsidy to the 1st petitioner. Petitioners also refer to the recommendation made by the 5th respondent on 27/1/2006 to the effect that the first petitioner is eligible for the subsidy as per Ext.P3 scheme. 5. Subsidy was not released and therefore the petitioners continued to represent to the authorities. Exts. P12 to P14 are the representations made by them in this behalf. Finally by Ext.P17, the 1st respondent intimated the petitioner that since the tractor has been purchased in the name of an individual, petitioners are not eligible for the 50% subsidy as per Ext.P3 scheme. It was thereupon that challenging Ext.P17 and praying for consequential reliefs enabling the petitioners to receive the subsidy provided as per Ext.P3, the writ petition has been filed. 6. The contention raised by the first respondent in the counter affidavit filed is that the first petitioner is ineligible for the benefit of the subsidy. The reason stated is that as per Clause 12 of Ext.P3, the machinery acquired should be registered jointly in the name of the President and Convenor/Secretary of the beneficiary Samithy whenever movable and immovable properties of the beneficiaries are registered and WPC 17868/07 :3 : certified by the concerned Agricultural Officer. The contention that is raised is that since the registration of the tractor in question is in the name of the second petitioner and not in the joint names of the President and Secretary, the claim of the petitioners do not satisfy the requirement of Clause 12 of Ext.P3. 7. As already noticed, Ext.P6 invoice shows the name of the second petitioner. Assuming that he has the capacity of the first petitioner, even then, so long as the registration is not in the joint name of the President and the Secretary, one cannot say that the registration of the tractor satisfies the requirements of Clause 12. Though the petitioners do have an explanation answering this contention of the respondents that it was an inadverted mistake committed due to the insistence of the Motor Vehicles Department, still having regard to the terms of Ext.P3, I cannot accept that plea and grant the relief sought for. 8. Therefore, at this distance of time, the only possible way out is that the petitioners should modify the registration in such a manner that it satisfies the requirements of Ext.P3 without in any manner disturbing the security that is furnished to the 6th respondent. 9. Therefore, the petitioner may approach the 7th respondent, WPC 17868/07 :4 : making a suitable request for getting the vehicle registered in the joint name of the President and the Secretary of the first petitioner, without in any manner disturbing the security that is offered to the 6th respondent. 10. It is directed that if the petitioners make such an application to the 7th respondent, he shall decide on the request of the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 2 weeks of its receipt. If orders are passed by the 7th respondent in the manner as stated above, it will be open to the petitioners to take up with the 1st respondent, in which event, the 1st respondent shall decide on the claim of the petitioners, at any rate within 8 weeks of its receipt. Petitioners may produce a copy of this judgment before respondents 1 and 7 for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp