IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2010 / 2ND POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36743 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KOTTARAKKARA PUBLIC WORKS SKILLED WORKERS LABOUR CONTRACT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., Q-459, KOTTARAKKARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REJANI.A. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.AJAYAKUMAR SMT.K.K.SREEJA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), KOLLAM, PIN 691001. 3. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), KOTTARAKKARA, PIN 691506. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.36743 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 23rd December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Labour Contract Public Works Skilled Workers Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. This writ petition has been filed mainly aggrieved by the delay in the matter of consideration of Ext.P13 application submitted by the petitioner for eligibility certificate to take up contract works in terms of Ext.P1 Government order. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner in terms of Ext.P3 judgment and Exts.P8 and P9 orders. Ext.P1 is a Government order dated 13.11.1997. As per the same, Government issued orders revising the mandatory limits for taking up contract works prescribed as per the earlier orders. In terms of Ext.P1 order the Registrar of Co- operative Societies has to classify the societies into `A', `B' and `C' classes in terms of the guidelines thereunder. Initially, the petitioner society was classified as `C' class society. Later, it was upgraded as `B' class and then as class `A' based on the increase in the share capital, number of members as also the volume of work executed by the society. Subsequently, Ext.P2 has been issued whereby the financial limit for WP(C).No.36743/2010 2 untertaking individual works by the petitioner society has been enhanced to Rs.25 lakhs and the total work to be executed by the society at a time was enhanced to Rs.1,00,000/-. Evidently, as per the said order such enhancement was effected only as a temporary measure. It is pertinent to note that though the said exemption was ordered to be on temporary basis no time limit has been prescribed thereunder. On an earlier occasion, ignoring Ext.P2 Government order the second respondent refused to issue eligibility certificate to the society and thereupon the matter was taken up before this Court in O.P.No.22779 of 1999. The said original petition was disposed of as per Ext.P3 judgment. 2. It is evident from Ext.P3 judgment that a statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents in the said original petition wherein it was contended that eligibility certificate could be issued only on the basis of classification as provided by Ext.P5 (Ext.P1 herein) and that the society was not classified for the past about two decades. Further, it was stated therein that the request of the petitioner society for eligibility certificate could be considered only after such classification. However, the said contentions were repelled by this Court taking note of the special sanction granted to the petitioner society in Ext.P2. Thereafter, it was held as follows:- WP(C).No.36743/2010 3 “Since the special sanction was given, it cannot be said that eligibility certificate can be issued only on the basis of the classification as provided by Ext.P5. 3. In view of Ext.P4, the petitioner is eligible for getting the eligibility certificate within the amount mentioned in Ext.P4. Accordingly, the eligibility certificate may be issued to the petitioner-Society. Original Petition is allowed.” Exts.P5 and P4 referred to in Ext.P3 judgment are respectively produced in this writ petition as Exts.P1 and P2 respectively. Admittedly, based on Ext.P3 judgment, till 2006 eligibility certificates were issued to the petitioner society for taking up contract works. Later, the request of the petitioner society for eligibility certificate was turned down reiterating the grounds which were actually repelled by this Court on the earlier occasion. As per Ext.P9, an interim order was issued to the second respondent therein to issue eligibility certificate to the petitioner- Society for the purpose of undertaking public contract works. Pursuant to the same, Ext.P10 eligibility certificate has been issued. On another occasion, the petitioner was constrained to file another writ petition and that culminated in issuance of Ext.P11 eligibility certificate. WP(C).No.36743/2010 4 Despite the aforesaid circumstances, when the petitioner submitted Ext.P13 application requesting the second respondent to issue eligibility certificate for the purpose of undertaking contract works in terms of Ext.P2, the second respondent virtually declined to pass any orders thereon. In fact, Ext.P13 is still pending consideration before the second respondent. It is in the said circumstances that this writ petition has been filed. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent in this writ petition. A perusal of the contentions therein would reveal that the objections made thereunder are nothing but reiteration of the objections raised and rejected on the earlier occasions. That part, according to the 2nd respondent, Ext.P13 application is infected with certain defects such as:- (a) An arrear amount of Rs.15,000/- towards Government share capital contribution which is pending due to the Government. (b) A certificate showing that the petitioner society is free from corruption and that there is no arrear amount pending due to the Government has to be submitted along with the application. (c) An amount of Rs.426.52 towards audit fee is pending due during 2008-09. (d) Details regarding the number of employment WP(C).No.36743/2010 5 days and related account on contract work of Rs.38 lakhs already taken and whether the said amount was included in the amount of Rs.97 lakhs sanctioned for the same purpose, have not been submitted along with the application.” I am of the view that the defects noted thereunder shall not stand in the way of consideration of Ext.P13 application. I will deal with the sustainability or otherwise of the said objections a little later. With respect to the entitlement of the petitioner society to get eligibility certificate in terms of Ext.P2 and in the light of Exts.P3, P8 and P9, I am of the view that the objections raised in the counter affidavit cannot be raised by the respondents to contend that the petitioner is ineligible to get eligibility certificate. As already noticed, the contentions raised as per the counter affidavit are nothing but reiteration of the objections which were raised on earlier occasions and after consideration rejected by this Court as is obvious from Ext.P3. As long as Ext.P2 Government order stands, the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of the said Government order. True that in Ext.P2 it is specifically stated that the exemption is only temporary. So long as no time limit has been prescribed, in the light of Ext.P3 judgment, the benefit of Ext.P2 Government order cannot be denied to the petitioner. In short, I am of WP(C).No.36743/2010 6 the view that the respondents are bound to consider Ext.P13 application of the petitioner for eligibility certificate in the light of Ext.P2 Government order. In view of Ext.P3 judgment and Ext.P9 order there is no reason or justification for rejecting the request for eligibility certificate as requested vide Ext.P13. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider Ext.P13 application submitted by the petitioner for eligibility certificate for taking up contract works in terms of Ext.P2 Government order and to grant the same in terms of Exts.P3 and P9. The same shall be done by the 2nd respondent expeditiously, at any rate within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. With respect to the objections referred to in the counter affidavit as (a) to (d) in paragraph 10, in case any amount is legally due from the petitioner, it will be open to the Government to initiate appropriate steps for realisation of the same. In case the petitioner is legally bound to give the details regarding the number of employment days and related account on contract work referred to in ground (d), it will be open to the competent authority to call for such details from the petitioner. It is made clear that with respect to the claim of the petitioner for compensation and entitlement of the petitioner for the WP(C).No.36743/2010 7 same, this Court has not made any observation. In case it is legally sustainable, the petitioner will be at liberty to raise it before the appropriate forum in appropriate proceedings. In the counter affidavit it is stated that certain complaints were received against the very functioning of the petitioner society. Since those are not subject matters of this writ petition, I do not think it proper and necessary to consider those contentions in this proceedings. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation as to the sustainability or otherwise of such contentions. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS