IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27898 of 2011(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- S.VASUDEVAN, S/O.SANTHARAM, PROPRIETOR, M/S.V.M.S.ENTERPRISES NO.67, (OLD NO.27), BURKIT ROAD, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI-400 017. BY ADVS. SRI.R.AZAD BABU, SMT.H.ANJALIDEVI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR - 688 001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPT., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. R1 BY ADV. SRI.B.SAJEEV KUMAR,S.C, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASHREE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.27898/2011-J: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF FINAL DECREE DATED 24-3-2007 IN OS NO.63 OF 2004 OF THE SUB COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF E.P.NO.1 OF 2008 DATED 1-1-2008 IN OS NO.63 OF 2004 OF THE SUB COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF E.A.NO.339/08 DATED 6.8.2008. EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF OBJECTIONS TO E.A.NO.339/08 DATED 25.8.2008 FILED BY THE DECREE HOLDER. EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF KERALA RELIEF UNDERTAKING (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) ACT 1961. EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.G.O.(RT)NO.437/07/ID DATED 18-9-2007 PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE. EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17-8-2011 IN O.P(C)NO.1526 OF 2011 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.G.O.(RT)217/2011/ID DATED 14-2-2011. EXHIBIT P9- COPY OF THE WRITE UP PUBLISHED IN THE DESABHIMANI DAILY DATED 29.11.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 27898 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P8 notification of the Government of Kerala, under the provisions of the Kerala Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1961 declaring the first respondent herein as a “relief undertaking” for the purpose of the said Act. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as is evidenced by Ext.P9, newspaper report, Company is making profit and is implementing projects for its expansion. It is stated that it is at that stage, Ext.P8 notification is issued under the provisions of the Act and that the notification has been issued only to defeat the claim of the creditors like the petitioner. It is on these allegations this writ petition has been filed. 2. Act 6 of 1962 referred to above defines “relief undertaking”. Under Section 2(b), “relief undertaking” W.P.(C) No. 27898 OF 2011 :2 : means as industrial undertaking in respect of which a declaration under Section 3 is in force. S.3 reads thus: Declaration of relief undertaking. (1) If at any time, it appears to the Government necessary to do so, the Government may, by notification in the Gazette, declare that an industrial undertaking specified in the notification, whether started, acquired or otherwise taken over by the Government and carried on or proposed to be carried on by themselves or under their authority, or to which any loan, guarantee or other financial assistance has been provided by the Government, shall, with effect from the date specified for the purpose in the notification, be conducted to serve as a measure of preventing unemployment or of unemployment relief & the undertaking shall accordingly be deemed to be a relief W.P.(C) No. 27898 OF 2011 :3 : undertaking for purposes of this Act. (2) A notification under sub- section (1) shall have effect for such period not exceeding two years as may be specified in the notification: but it shall be renewable by like notification from time to time for further periods not exceeding twelve moths at a time, so however that all the periods in the aggregate do not exceed ten years.” 3. A reading of the section shows that if the Government is satisfied that the circumstances provided under S.3(1)of the Act are in existence, even in respect of a Company which is not in loss, the Government may notify such Company as a “relief undertaking”. Therefore, even if the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P9 newspaper discloses the Company is making profit in the current year is accepted, that does not prevent the Government from issuing a notification like Ext.P8. W.P.(C) No. 27898 OF 2011 :4 : 4. I have also gone through Ext.P9 newspaper report. This newspaper report shows the increased production achieved by the Company during the year 2010. It does not say that the Company has made any profit during the said year. Therefore the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is factually also incorrect. In such circumstances I do not find any illegality in Ext.P8 notification. Hence this petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-