Thomas Varkey vs The Kerala State Electricity Board on 8 July, 2010

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

Thomas Varkey vs The Kerala State Electricity Board on 8 July, 2010

Bench: S.Siri Jagan

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21114 of 2010(L)


1. THOMAS VARKEY, S/O.VARKEY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHAIRMAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :08/07/2010

 O R D E R
                          S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                     ------------------------------
                     W.P.(C) No.21114 OF 2010
                     -------------------------------
               Dated this the 8th day of July, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a licencee of an ARD. According to the petitioner, the Kerala State Electricity Board, by Ext.P1, has taken a decision to allot the Board's quarters/buildings which are lying vacant, for accommodation of persons of other departments and Public Utility Institutions. The petitioner contends that the ARD being an institution established under the Essential Commodities Act is a Public Utility Institution and therefore the quarters of the KSE Board which are vacant can be allotted to the petitioner, who is a handicapped person by virtue of Ext.P1. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs:

"(i) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider Ext.P3 on merits and pass orders on the same after affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard;

(ii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allot to the petitioner a quarter which is lying vacant as evident from Ext.P6".

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The relevant portion of Ext.P1 reads thus:

"The B.O. referred above states that "there is no objection to allot K.S.E. Board's quarters/building, if available, to accommodate offices of other Govt. Departments/Public institutions or for residential accommodation of their employees if such allotment does not affect adversely the interest of the K.S.E.Board, and if these are not required by eligible employees of the Board". It also states that 'before allocation, Chief Engineers will ensure that the services of the institutions/employees are useful to the K.S.E.Board or the public in general'"

From the same, it is abundantly clear that what is contemplated therein is to permit allotment of KSE Board quarters for residential accommodation of employees of other Departments/Public Institutions. A licencee of an ARD cannot claim to be an employee of a Public Institution. Therefore, even assuming that a ration shop can be considered to be a Public Institution, Ext.P1 does not cover a licencee of an ARD. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd 3 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court