Kerala High Court
Pranesh R vs Polpully Grama Panchayat on 2 July, 2025
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2025 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1947
WA NO. 1687 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.08.2023 IN WP(C)
NO.27362 OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/S:
1 PRANESH R.
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. RAJENDRAN, RESIDING AT 10/381, ATHICODE.
PANAYUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678552
2 ANANTHAKRISHNAN
AGED 52 YEARS
RESIDING AT 7/320,PALIYODE, KOLLUPARAMBU,
VERKOLI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678552
BY ADVS.
SHRI.G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
SMT.K.S.SMITHA
SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
SHRI.BIJOY SAM GEORGE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 POLPULLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
POLPULLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, PALAKKAD-
CHITTUR ROAD, POLPULLY, PALAKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN -
678552
W.A.No.1687 of 2023
2
2025:KER:48375
2 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3 DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI -CORRUPTION BUREAU
VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., OPPOSITE KSRTC DEPOT,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
4 MEAT, EGG, FISH PROCUREMENT, PROCESSING AND
MARKETING CO-OP.N SOCIETY LTD. (MEFCO), MALAMPUZHA
BLOCK PANCHAYAT
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. MEAT, EGG, FISH
PROCUREMENT, PROCESSING AND MARKETING CO-OPM
SOCIETY LTD. (MEFCO) KOLLUPARAMBU, VERKOLI P.O.,
POLPULLY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678552
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1687 of 2023
3
2025:KER:48375
AMIT RAWAL & P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, J.
.................................................................
W.A.No.1687 of 2023
.......................................................
Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
P.V. Balakrishnan, J.
This intra court appeal is filed by the petitioners in W.P. (C)No.27362 of 2023, challenging the judgment dated 18.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition.
2. The appellants, who are the ward members of the 10 th and 7th wards of Polpully Grama Panchayat, filed the writ petition challenging a contract of aquaculture granted to the 4 th respondent Co-operative Society. It was contended by the appellants that such a contract had been awarded by the Panchayat without inviting tenders.
3. The learned Single Judge after hearing both sides, dismissed the writ petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.2 & 3 and the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the award of the aquaculture contract to the 4 th respondent W.A.No.1687 of 2023 4 2025:KER:48375 without inviting tenders cannot be sustained in light of Ext. P3 circular, and the learned single judge has not considered the materials on record in a proper perspective. He further submitted that there are similar societies like the 4 th respondent who are ready to do the work and pay more than the amount now fixed by the Panchayat, and the decision of the Panchayat to award the contract to the 4th respondent is based on political considerations.
6. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1 st respondent supported the impugned judgment and contended that, going by Ext.P3 circular, there is no need to invite tenders.
7. In the present case, the 1st respondent Panchayat has granted a lease for aquaculture to the 4 th respondent, Co- operative Society, for an amount of Rs.25,000/- per year. A perusal of Ext.P3 circular dated 15.07.2020, which deals with the leasehold contracts relating to public ponds, would show that the Panchayat is having the right to lease out public tanks/ponds for aquaculture, and while doing so, preference has to be given to SC/ST Societies, Kudumbashrees, Youth Associations, and Agricultural Societies. It also says that the lease can thus be granted to these institutions even without collecting any annual fees or by giving discounts. As rightly found by the learned W.A.No.1687 of 2023 5 2025:KER:48375 Single Judge, if Ext.P3 allows the Panchayat to grant leases even without any charges, there is no question of inviting any tenders in such cases. It is also to be taken note that the appellants are not persons who have applied for getting the contract and therefore, cannot be termed as persons aggrieved by the granting of the contract to the 4th respondent.
In the light of the afore discussions, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and hence, this writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE Sd/-
P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE Dxy W.A.No.1687 of 2023 6 2025:KER:48375 APPENDIX OF WA 1687/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 01.08.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT TO THE APPELLANT PROVIDING THE DETAILS OF PONDS IN POLPULLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT ALONG WITH THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION