IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2011 / 7TH SRAVANA 1933 WA.No. 1063 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.5399/2011 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------ P.G. NARAYANAN KUTTY, PALAKKATTU PUTHEN PURA HOUSE, NAYATHODE.P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD SRI.SAJU J PANICKER SRI.LIJO KURIAN JOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7: --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INIDA, CIVIL AVIATION DEPARTMENT, B BLOCK, RAJIV GANDHI BHAVAN, SAFDARJUNG AIRPORT, AUROBINDO MARG, NEW DELHI. PIN-110003. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION, OPPOSITE SAFDARJUNG AIRPORT,NEW DELHI-110003. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITY, BUREAU OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY, A WING, 1-3 FLOOR, JENPATH BHAVAN, JENPATH, NEW DELHI-110001. 4. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF SECURITY,BUREAU OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY, SOUTHER REGION, CHENNAI AIRPORT, CHENNAI-600027. 5. THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED KOCHI AIRPORT.P.O., NEDUMBASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. PIN-683111. 6. THE AIR INDIA LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, AIR INDIA BUILDING NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI. PIN-400021. 7. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ASST.S.G. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR FOR R1 TO R4 ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R5 G.P. SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL FOR R7 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.1063 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 29th day of July, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel for the appellant, Standing Counsel for 5th respondent and Assistant Solicitor General for respondents 1 to 4 who took notice on admission. 2. The appeal is filed against judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to interfere in the matter because according to the learned Single Judge, appellant has no locus standi to seek direction from this court to respondents 1 to 4 to engage Air India, 6th respondent herein to handle cargo security in the Airport. The appellant's allegation is that 5th respondent is handling cargo security in the Airport, though it is the statutory responsibility of the Government and it's agencies. The writ petition is not filed as a public interest litigation and appellant, still an employee of the Air India, is trying to promote the business of Air India. We feel appellant need not take up business promotion for Air India at his level because it is a 2 Public Sector Undertaking under the control of the Government which is supposed to be in the hands of experts handling Air India management. We do not find any justification to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Writ Appeal is consequently dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms