IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10717 of 2008(A) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. KARTHYAYINI THANKAPPAN, W/O.THANKAPPAN, PERUMPALLIKKOTTU, PAINAVU, 56 COLONY, IDUKKI. 2. RAJAMMA SIVAN, CHIRAMATTEL, 56 COLONY, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. 3. AMMINI SASI, VARIKKANIKKAL, KEERITHODU, KEERITHODU P.O., IDUKKI. 4. SOBHA SHAJI, KOCHUMRIYIL, PAZHAYARIKANDOM, MYLAPPUZHA, IDUKKI. 5. SAJEENA, BIJU, KANATHIL, PAZHAYARIKANDOM PILLA CITY, IDUKKI. 6. SAROMANI, OLICKAL, MAZHUVADI, KANJIKUZHI P.O., IDUKKI. 7. SHYAMDA SASIKUMAR, SAVITHA NIVAS, NAYARUPARA P.O., IDUKKI. 8. SHYLA, KANDRAMATTATHIL, MANIPARA P.O., ATTIKKALAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 9. RAMANI SURENDRAN, KANJIRAMKUZHIYIL, KULAMAVU P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 10. C.V.DAMODARAN, CHIRAMATTEL, 56 COLONY, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. 11. SARADA KRISHNAMANI, KANIYAKUNNEL, MANIYARANKUDI, PAKITTAM, VAZHATHOPPU, P.O, IDUKKI. 12. AMBIKA MADHAVAN, MUTHALAKUZHIYIL, PAZHAYARIKANDOM P.O., NARAKULAM, IDUKKI. Kss ...2/- ..2..... WPC.NO.10717/2008 A 13. SOJAN K.S., KALAPPURAKKAL, MANIPARA P.O, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.C.S.MANILAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE IDUKKI BLOCK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, IDUKKI. 3. THE DISTRICT PLANNING COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY THE CONVENOR, THE DISTRICT PLANNING OFFICER, IDUKKI. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI MEMBER SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT PLANNING COMMITTEE, IDUKKI. R1,R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SUDHADEVI R2 BY ADV. MR.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.10717/2008 A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER DTD. 7/12/07. EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER DTD. 27/02/2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF CLARIFICATION DTD. 30/03/2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE DECISION TAKEN IN THE WORKING GROUP CONFERENCE OF THE GRAMA SABHA. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSAL FOR 2007-08. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE DECISION/RECOMMENDATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT SEMINAR DTD. 28/09/07. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.C.NO.8428/08 DTD. 14/03/2008. EXT.P9(A): PHOTOGRAPH OF CONSTRUCTIONS OF THE PETITIONER NO.1. EXT.P9(B): PHOTOGRAPH OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PETITIONER NO.2. EXT.P9(C): PHOTOGRAPH OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PETITIONER NO.6. EXT.P9(D): PHOTOGRAPH OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PETITIONER NO.10. EXT.P9(E): PHOTOGRAPH OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PETITIONER NO.13. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER NO.2,3,4 AND 12 THE VILLAGE OFFICER HAD ISSUED A CERTIFICATE. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER NO.3. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER NO.4. Kss .....2/- ...2...... WPC.NO.10717/2008 A EXT.P13: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER NO.12. EXT.P14: COPY OF THE PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE DECISION. EXT.P15: COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DTD. 17/12/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(A): COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE REVISED GUIDELINES VIDE G.O.(MS) NO.40/04/PLANNING DTD. 31/03/2004. EXT.R2(B): COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(C): COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(D): COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(E): COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(F): COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 9TH RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(G): COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 12TH RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(H): COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY 13TH RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).10717/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners members of a Scheduled Caste, and homeless persons sought for allotment of funds from the second respondent, Panchayat, under the Indira Avas Yojana by which financial aid is given to poor homeless persons for construction of houses. As per the scheme originally formulated, the individual applicant is entitled to get Rs.50,000/- for house construction. During the financial year 2006-07, the petitioners submitted their application and were sanctioned an amount of Rs.50,000/- for house construction. They had utilised the same as well. Due to the hike in price of raw materials such as steel, cement etc., they were not able to complete the construction. But learned counsel for the Panchayat points out that some among the petitioners had furnished the certificate stating that they have completed the construction. 2. By Ext.P2 order, Government enhanced the amount of Rs.50,000/- to Rs.70,000/-. The enhanced amount like the W.P.(C).10717/2008 2 original amount is to be disbursed by the concerned Panchayat and therefore, disbursal of the enhanced amount was subject to the availability of funds with the Panchayat as such. By Ext.P4, a decision was taken to implement Ext.P2. The grievance of the petitioners arises from the fact that in spite of the same, they had not been disbursed the enhanced amount of Rs.70,000/-. Hence the writ petition. 3. The Panchayat in its counter affidavit has taken the stand that the direction issued by the Government under Ext.P2 is dependant upon the availability of funds. But at the same time, it is admitted that for the subsequent year, 93 new beneficiaries had been identified and have been sanctioned amounts under the same scheme. What is significant is that the new beneficiaries had been sanctioned Rs.75,000/- whereas the old beneficiaries like the petitioners have been sanctioned and disbursed only Rs.50,000/-. That funds were available with the Panchayat, pursuant to the allotment for the subsequent year is clear from the above facts. W.P.(C).10717/2008 3 4. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the Panchayat should earmark sufficient funds to satisfy the claim of the petitioners along with other beneficiaries under the scheme for the year 2006-07, for sanction of the enhanced amount of Rs.70,000/- for construction of their homes. Steps should be taken by the Panchayat to see that the enhanced amount is made available to such beneficiaries, who are otherwise eligible under the scheme, before sanctioning amounts to other beneficiaries for the subsequent years (other than the year 2007-08 for which the beneficiaries have already been identified and allotted). Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs