Manal Varal Thozhilali … vs The District Collector on 26 March, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 8449 of 2007(E)


1. MANAL VARAL THOZHILALI SAMRAKSHANA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY, KONNATHADI PANCHAYATH,

3. THE SECRETARY, VELLATHOOVAL PANCHAYATH,

4. THE SECRETARY, KANJIKUZHI PANCHAYATH,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.SREEKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.JACOB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :26/03/2009

 O R D E R
                 P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
                  -----------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.8449 of 2007 - E
                   ---------------------------------
             Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009


                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is an organisation registered under the

Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies

Registration Act and members of the petitioner are the workers

engaged in sand mining in the various Panchayaths in Idukki

District. The main grievance is that the respondents/Panchayaths

having decided to assign the right to collect sand from the

various ‘kadavus’ situated in the Panchayaths on a contract basis,

the petitioner, being a society is unable to adopt the tactics being

followed by the contractors, particularly when the maximum

amount that could be quoted per load is only Rs.250/-. The

petitioner contends that at least some ‘kadavus’ in the

Panchayaths shall be reserved to associations like the petitioner

so as to protect the interest of the actual working class who are

the members of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has already projected their grievances by filing Ext.P2

W.P.(C).No.8449 of 2007 – E

2

representation before the 1st respondent, which is stated as still

pending. The petitioner will be at liberty to supplement Ext.P2

representation by filing any additional representation within a

period of one month from today. The 1st respondent is directed

to consider Ext.P2 representation and pass appropriate orders in

accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of being heard

to the petitioner and also to the respondents/Panchayaths, as

expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a span of four

months. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment

before the 1st respondent so as to enable the 1st respondent to

pursue further steps.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

bkn/-