IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 23466 of 2008(R) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- GIRIJA.S.NAIR, W/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, VELLOOR VEETTIL, MARKET P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.DILIP SRI.R.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT, TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 3. AYOOB, PROPRIETOR, BISMILA HOTEL, K.S.R.T.C CANTEEN, K.S.R.T.C. BUS STAND, MUVATTUPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R.SREELATHA FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.23466/2008 R APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF CERTIFICATE DTD.22/04/2000. EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DTD.29/06/1996. EXT.P3: COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT MANAGER (MKG), ERNAKULAM DAIRY DTD. 31/05/1996. EXT.P4: COPY OF ORDER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT, DTD.26/9/2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF NOTICE OF THE QUOTATION FOR THE YEAR 2008 DTD. 17/07/2008. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, DTD. 31/07/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 23466 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Exhibit P6 is under challenge. The petitioner is the mother of a mentally handicapped daughter. According to the petitioner, by Exhibit P2 proceedings of the first respondent, the petitioner was granted sanction to start a milma booth in the premises of Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Muvattupuzha. It is stated that this arrangement continued till Exhibit P6 was issued in 2008. It is stated that the allotment was under a special scheme for the benefit of the mentally challenged. In 2008, the respondents invited tenders and alloted the booth to the 3rd respondent on the basis of the offers that were received. According to the petitioner, since the booth was alloted under a special scheme and as the 3rd respondent is not a mentally challenged person, he is not entitled to get the booth. It is on that basis Exhibit P6 is challenged. 2. The learned Government pleader on instruction submits that the allotment by Exhibit P2 was only on a temporary basis. It is stated that in 2007, the allotment of the booth was on tender basis and W.P.(C) No. 23466/ 2008 2 the petitioner was the highest bidder. According to the Government pleader this year, 3rd respondent was the highest bidder. It is therefore, the booth was allotted to the 3rd respondent. 3. A reading of Exhibit P2, shows that the booth was alloted to the petitioner on the basis of an application made by her. It is specifically stated in Exhibit P2 that the allotment of the booth was a temporary arrangement. It is also stated that the sanction was subject to review at any time, and the petitioner will have to remove the booth from the hospital premises. Since the allotment of the booth was only on a temporary basis and not under any special scheme as canvassed by the petitioner, the decision of the respondents inviting competitive tenders for allotment of the booth cannot be faulted. It would appear, that the petitioner also has reconciled to that reality, since she had submitted her tender in 2007 when tenders were invited by the first respondent. If that be so, the petitioner cannot contend that the allotment of booth to the 3rd respondent is erroneous in any reason. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not even allowed to remove her articles, which she was W.P.(C) No. 23466/ 2008 3 using during the time when running the booth. If as stated by the petitioner, any materials belonging to her are available in the premises of Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, first respondent shall permit her to remove the same on production of copy of this judgment. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm