IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 28739 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- M/S. RELIANCE SECURITY AGENCY, REG. NO.2111,PREM BUILDING, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM, REPRESETED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. T.K.SAMBASIVAN. BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE SMT.MINI GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. THE CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER, MINISTRY OF LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT, NEW DELHI-110001. 3. THE INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, NATIONAL WATERWAY ROAD, NH 47, BY PASS, KANNADIKKADU,MARADU, ERNAKULAM-682304. 4. THE DIRECTOR, INLAND WATER WAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, NATIONAL WATER WAY ROAD, NH 47, BYE PASS, KANNADIKKADU, MARADU, ERNAKULAM PIN-682304. 5. M/S. GROUP 7 GUARD PVT. LTD.,KANDATHIL HOUSE, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-682025. 6. AKG MEMORIAL LABOUR CONTRACT SOCIETY LTD., FORT ROAD, P.B.NO.15, THALASSERY-679532. ADV. SHRI.P.C.CHACKO, CGC FOR R1-2 SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASG SRI.P.A.AUGUSTINE,SC,IWAI,INLAND WATERW FOR R3 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 28739 OF 2010 (N) ===================== Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that pursuant to Ext.P1 tender notice issued by the respondents inviting tenders for providing security guards, petitioner submitted their bids. It is stated that respondents 5 and 6 also had submitted their bids. The case of the petitioner is that the Government of India have notified the minimum wages and dearness allowance payable to security guards. It is stated that it was without taking into account these benefits, that respondents 5 and 6 have submitted their bids. It is stated that if the quotation now submitted by respondent 5 and 6 are accepted, that will amount to violation of the Minimum Wages Act and that ultimately the liability will fall upon the respondents themselves being the principal employees. It is on this basis that the writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to the respondents to consider the minimum wages factor also as and when the tenders received in response to Ext.P1 are evaluated and finalised. 2. Standing counsel for respondents 3 and 4, who has WPC No. 28739/10 :2 : obtained instructions in the matter submits that the tenders received from respondents 5 and 6 satisfied the minimum wages requirements notified by the Government of India. If that be so, the premise on which the petitioner has approached this Court is incorrect. Therefore, I record the submission of the standing counsel that the tenders received from respondents 5 and 6 complies with the minimum wages requirements specified by the Government of India and close this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp