HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1608 OF 2002 ORDER: The petitioners are the certificate holders under the Weights and Measures Act, for undertaking the activity of repairing the instruments of weights and measures at Nirmal, Adilabad District. The 5th respondent was also issued one such certificate. They approached this Court by filing WP No.23395 of 2001, alleging that the 5th respondent does not hold a valid certificate and though a complaint, pointing out the same, was made to the respondents 1 to 4, no action has been taken therein. The writ petition was disposed of on 13-11-2001, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to verify the matter and pass orders. In compliance with the said directions, the 1st respondent called for reports from the respondents 2 to 4, and on the basis of the same, passed an order, dated 11-01-2002, observing that the 5th respondent holds a valid certificate and that he is entitled to undertake the activity of repairing and standardizing the Weights, Measures, Beam Scales and Counter Scales. The same is challenged in this writ petition. 2. The petitioners contend that the 1st respondent did not verify the relevant facts and that the additional items, such as Beam Scales and Counter Scales were added to the certificate issued in the year 1994, without any basis, in favour of the 5th respondent. Reference is made to the earlier certificate held by the 5th respondent in the year 1977. 3. On behalf of the respondents 1 to 4, a counter affidavit is filed. According to them, the 5th respondent was issued a skilled worker certificate No.234 of 1994, basing on the certificate issued in 1977 and 1989. They deny the allegation that the 5th respondent is undertaking the activity, without holding a certificate. 4. Heard Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. None appears for the 5th respondent. 5. When the petitioners approached this Court, by filing WP No.23395 of 2001, their grievance was that the 5th respondent is undertaking the activity without holding any valid certificate. This Court observed that the respondents 1 to 4 are under obligation to verify the facts mentioned in the complaint, submitted by the petitioners. Acting on the directions issued by this Court, the 1st respondent called for a report from the respondents 2 to 4 and passed the order, dated 11-01-2002. It is clearly mentioned that the 5th respondent was issued a skilled worker certificate in the year 1994 and that he is entitled to repair the Weights, Measures and Beam Scales and Counter Scales. Therefore, the assumption of the petitioners that the 5th respondent does not hold the valid licence or certificate is proved to be incorrect. 6. Across the Bar, it is stated that the certificate issued to the 5th respondent does not accord with the one issued in the year 1977. The same cannot be entertained at this stage. If the petitioners have any grievance, they can put forward the same, which in turn, can be taken into account by respondents 1 to 4, as and when they renew or issue a fresh certificate to the 5th respondent. 7. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing that it shall be open to the petitioners to put forward their objections as to the competence of the certificate of the 5th respondent to undertake repairs of certain category of Weights and Measures, and the same shall be taken into account, as and when the occasion arises for the respondents 1 to 4 to renew or issue fresh certificate in favour of the 5th respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J January 27, 2010. KTL