IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 W.A.No. 1715 of 2008 ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.12060/2008 DATED 22/05/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C): ---------------------------------------------------------- R.P. REMANAN, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. V.K.PARAMESWARA KURUP, NOW RESIDING AT 'HRUDYA', THANNEERMUKKOM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN: 688 527. BY ADV. SRI.P.T.DINESH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE W.P.(C): --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ARKANILAYAM, M.P. APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHAKKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE LAW SECRETARY, LAW DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1715 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 25th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No.12060 of 2008 dated 22nd May, 2008 is the subject matter of this writ appeal. (2) The National Human Rights Commission by its letter dated 13.12.2000 had requested the State Government to institute certain incentive schemes to motivate the authors/intellectuals to write their books on human rights aspects of the matter in Malayalam language. (3) Pursuant to the request so made by the National Human Rights Commission, the State Government by its order dated 29th January, 2004 has formulated a Scheme. The Scheme is known as 'Award for Creative Writings on Human Rights in Malayalam'. Under the Scheme the eligibility criteria is fixed. One such criteria is that, only those books published within three years immediately preceding the date of calling for applications will be considered for the benefit under the Scheme. (4) Admittedly, in the instant case, the petitioner has published the book on human rights some time in the year 1999. W.A.No.1715 of 2008 2 His creative book in Malayalam is not considered by the State Government for the purpose of granting incentive under the Scheme. Aggrieved by this omission on the part of the State Government, the petitioner was before this Court. (5) According to the petitioner, the cut off date fixed by the State Government for considering the grant of incentive under the Scheme is arbitrary and, therefore, is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. (6) The learned Single Judge has not accepted the assertion made by the petitioner, and accordingly has rejected the writ petition. That is how the petitioner is before us in this writ appeal. (7) One of the conditions in Clause 5 of the Scheme reads as under: “Only those works published within 3 years immediately preceding the date of calling for applications will be considered under the scheme.” (8) By fixing this eligibility criteria, the State Government intends to grant incentive/award under the Scheme only for those authors who have published their books within three years immediately preceding the date of calling for applications. All those persons who have published their books within three years from the date of calling of the applications would be considered for awarding the benefit under the Scheme. W.A.No.1715 of 2008 3 (9) In the instant case, as we have already stated, the petitioner had published his book in the year 1999 and, therefore, he cannot be considered for granting any incentive under the Scheme. In our opinion, under the Scheme equals are treated equally. If that concept is accepted, it cannot be said that the action of the State Government is either arbitrary or illegal, and therefore, is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (10) In that view of the matter, we do not see any error in the orders passed by the learned Single Judge which would call for our interference in appeal. Therefore, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE vns/dk