IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 33101 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BIJU P.K.,AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. KARTHIKEYAN, THUNDIPARAMBIL,KUMBALANGI PO, KOCHI 682 007. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN IYER SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. SECRETARY, COCHIN HERITAGE ZONE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, DTPC ERNAKULAM OFFICE, KANAYANOOR TALUK BUILDING PARK AVENUE, KOCHI. ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT: 4. E.K.ABDUL RAHIM, S/O.KUNJU MUHAMMED, RESIDING AT V/377, BUNGALOW PARAMBU, MATTANCHERRY. (R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO.15765/08) ADV. SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.JOHN VIPIN FOR ADDL.R4 SMT.S.A.SHERLY FOR ADDL.R4 SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE FOR ADDL.R4 SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI FOR ADDL.R4 GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 33101/08. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE CASTE CERTIFICATE. P2. COPY OF THE APPLICATION. P3. COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. P4. COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD.30.11.07. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: R4(1) COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD.7.7.04 BY THE MEDICAL BOARD. “(2) COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD.10.11.08. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.33101 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 13th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a member of a Scheduled Caste. It is his submission in this writ petition that with a view to promoting tourism in the area of Fort Kochi, the Department of Tourism has opened 32 stalls in Fort Kochi in the years 2002 to 2004. The petitioner is also desirous of getting allotment of one of the stalls, for which the petitioner preferred an application before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner complains that respondents 1 to 3 are allotting stalls without any notice and without calling for tenders. The petitioner would submit that the petitioner is equally entitled like anybodyelse, to be considered for such allotment and such allotment should only be on the basis of public tenders or such accepted mode of allotment of stalls by open competition. Therefore, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “a. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to allot the stalls in Cochin Heritage Zone Conservation Society only after issuing public notice and calling for tenders; b. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to consider Ext.P2 and pass orders within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; c. issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2 2. Originally this Court passed the following interim order on 10.11.2008: “Admit. Issue notice to respondents. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The Respondents are directed not to allot the stalls in Cochin Heritage Zone Conservation Society, Fort Kochi, without public notification inviting tenders and without giving wide publicity through the print media.” On 27.2.2009 that interim order was modified as follows: “Heard both sides. Case of the Government pleader is that the proposal is to allot stalls in the Cochin Heritage Zone Conservation Society to the persons who are evicted from the area in question. If that be so, I see no reason to continue the stay as ordered in the interim order dated 10/11/2008. Therefore, the order will stand modified to the effect that the stay order will not stand against the allotment of stalls to the persons who were evicted from the Heritage Zone Area.” 3. The petitioner now submits that the petitioner has no objection if the allotment of stalls is made to only persons who were evicted from the Cochin Heritage Zone and if any stall is to be alloted to anybodyelse other than the evictees from the Heritage Zone area, that shall only be on the basis of public tenders. The learned Government Pleader, on the basis of counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, would contend that so far the stalls have been allotted only to evictees from the Heritage Zone area. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: 3 If, after allotment of the stalls to the evictees from the Heritage Zone area, there are stalls which remain to be allotted, such allotment of stalls shall only be on the basis of public tenders. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge