IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23104 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- M/S.RAVEN-AIR SECURITY AGENCY, REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR, COL.(RTD) R.N.RAVI AYILAT, AMC-V/3,KOTTAMKULANGARA WARD AVULOOKUNNU.P.O, ALLEPPEY-688 006. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL OF RE-SETTLEMENT, NEW DELHI. 2. THE SENIOR INSTALLATION MANAGER, BHARATH PETTOLEUM CORPORATION LTD.(BPCL) IRIMPANAM INSTALLATION, IRIMPANAM, COCHIN-682 309. BY ADVS. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R1 SRI. S. SAJIN, SC FOR BPCL SRI. ALEXANDER THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No. 23104 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 31st day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner seeks extension of period of security services coverage work granted by the 2nd respondent. The right to get extension of period of contract for a further period of two years have been upheld by this court in several judgments, copies of which are produced by the petitioner in this writ petition. The 2nd respondent has now issued a letter to the petitioner to the following effect: “Ref. your letter Ref. No. RASA/1602/BPCL/Contract/ 01, dt.23.7.08 on the above subject, we would like to inform you that we agree to renew the above contract for a period of two years w.e.f. 1-8-2008 to 31-7-2010 on the existing rates, terms and conditions subject to approval by Directorate General Resettlement, New Delhi.” 2. But the petitioner apprehends that in view of the specific clause to the effect that the renewal is subject to approval by Director General of Re-settlement. In so far as the right to forgetting extension of the period on contract is supplied by decision of this Court. I do not think that the W.P(C)No. 23104 of 2008 - 2 - 2nd respondent can now make any contention for such extension. 3. I have heard the Counsel for the 2nd respondent and Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the 2nd respondent. In the above circumstances, upholding the right of the petitioner to get extension of contract by orders from 1.8.2008. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs