IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 25438 of 2005(C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- THRISSUR CORPORATION ELECTRICITY WORKERS UNION, REGD.NO.226/80, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, S.A.MAHIN, SENIOR ASSISTANT, THRISSUR CORPORATION, ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, (P.A)DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE URBAN AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF URBAN AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THRISSUR CORPORATION, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 4. THRISSUR CORPORATION ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT, REP. BY THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 5. G.BENNAN, THE SECRETARY, THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.V.MANU R3, TO R5 ADV. MR.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATION R3, TO R5 BY ADV.MR.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL, MR.K.A.SREEJITH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.25438/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 19.8.1937 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF MAHARAJA OF COCHIN. P2:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT FOR 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005 -2006. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 19.2.1970 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 17.8.81 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 11.7.05. P6:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 12.7.04 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE LOCAL FUND AUDIT DEPARTMENT DTD. 13.7.04. P8:- COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 21.7.05 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ASSISTANT SECRETARY. P9:- COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.29 DTD. 3.8.05 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT CORPORATION COUNCIL. P10:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 17.8.05 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R3(a):- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 2.8.02 IN OP. NO.16176/98 (A) PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R3(b):- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 15.11.04 IN WA. NO.2439/03 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 25438 OF 2005 (C) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the trade union representing the employees of the Electricity Department of the 3rd respondent Corporation. The main prayers sought are to restrain the respondents from merging the funds and accounts of the 4th respondent Electricity Department of the 3rd respondent Corporation and to restrain them from utilising the same, for purposes unconnected with the Electricity Department. There is a further prayer to quash Exts.P9 and P10, the resolution and the Government Order. 2. Ext.P1 dated 19/8/1937 is the proceedings of the Government of His Highness the Maharaja of Cochin, containing directions regarding the maintenance of accounts and finance of the Electricity Department of the 3rd respondent Corporation. This order interalia provides for maintenance of separate account and that the funds also shall be maintained and managed in the manner as provided therein. There is no dispute between the parties that the affairs of the Electricity Department were being WPC 25438/05 :2 : managed in the manner as directed in Ext.P1. 3. However, for reasons of its own, Corporation passed Ext.P9 resolution, authorising the Secretary of the Corporation to handle the financial matters concerning the Electricity Department, which were till then handled by the Assistant Secretary in charge of the Electricity Department. Subsequently, Government also issued Ext.P10 order dated 17/8/05, authorising the Secretary to maintain accounts, issue of cheques and such other matters concerning the Electricity Department. It is on the issuance of Exts.P9 and P10, that this writ petition was filed wherein the petitioner mainly contends that as a result of Exts.P9 and P10, there will be a merger of financial resources of the Electricity Department, contrary to the directions in Ext.P1. 4. Corporation and the Government have filed their counter affidavits. The main contention raised by the Corporation to justify Exts.P9 and P10 is that the Assistant Secretary, who was in charge of the Electricity Department was functioning in a manner which was intolerable and illegal. It is stated that in order to remedy the situation and for ensuring proper administration in the Electricity Department, it was WPC 25438/05 :3 : necessary to pass a resolution in the nature of Ext.P9. It is stated that the Government also have approved the said resolution as per Ext.P10. 5. Answering the plea of the petitioner about the possible merging of the financial resources of the Electricity Department into the general financial resources of the Corporation, counsel for the Corporation contends that Ext.P1 at best has the effect of Government Order, which can be modified by the Government by yet another order. He says that by Ext.P10, there has been such a modification. 6. As far as Ext.P1 is concerned, Ext.P1 directs the manner in which the affairs of the Electricity Department shall be carried on. Corporation has no dispute about the binding nature of Ext.P1 or about the fact that it was being followed in its letter and spirit until now. Exts.P9 and P10 only vests some of the duties which were till then carried on by the Assistant Secretary on the Secretary of the Corporation, but, these do not dilute Ext.P1 in its totality. Therefore, except that the Secretary shall carry carry on the duties which are mentioned in Exts.P9 and P10, nothing more has been done to dilute Ext.P1. If that be so, Exts.P9 and P10 WPC 25438/05 :4 : cannot be taken advantage for anything more than what is contemplated in Exts.P9 and P10 itself and in so far as the rest of the matters are concerned, the position as provided in Ext.P1 and what was prevailing prior to Exts.P9 and P10 is bound to continue. 7. In so far as the prayer of the petitioner for quashing Exts.P9 and P10 is concerned, counter affidavit of the Corporation, and in particular, the averments in para 6 thereof, shows that the Corporation was fully justified in passing such a resolution and the Government also cannot be faulted for having issued Ext.P10. That apart, Exts.P9 and P10 only discloses a rearrangement of internal affairs of the Corporation, which is entirely for the Corporation and Government to decide and no element of illegality can be attributed either to Exts.P9 or P10. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for quashing Exts.P9 and P10 and clarifying that except in so far as the issues covered by Exts.P9 and P10, rest of the matters as provided in Ext.P1 will continue to govern the parties. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp