Kerala State Security Staff … vs Inland Waterways Authority Of … on 26 June, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19329 of 2008(S)


1. KERALA STATE SECURITY STAFF ASSOCIATION
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR,

3. REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL)

4. THE GOVT.OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE

5. GROUP 7 GUARDS (INDIA) PVT. LTD

6. THE KERALA INDUSTRIAL SECUTIRY FORCE

7. RELIANCE SECURITY AGENCY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VINOD VALLIKAPPAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

 Dated :26/06/2008

 O R D E R
                    H.L.Dattu, C.J. & A.K.Basheer, J.
                    ---------------------------------------------
                        W.P.(C).No.19329 of 2008-S
                    --------------------------------------------
                    Dated, this the 26th day of June, 2008

                                 JUDGMENT

H.L.Dattu,C.J.

In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,

the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-

“a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other

appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records

leading to Ext.P3 and P4 tender and quash the same.

(b) Issue a declaration that the petitioner

association are entitled for the minimum wages and such

other mandatory statutory contributions.

(c) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other

appropriate writ order or direction against the respondents 1

and 2 to make re-tender fixing the minimum rates of wages

payable to the workers with the statutory contributions and

tax and not to accept any tender below the rates so fixed”.

2. The awarder has awarded the contract to 5th respondent

for a particular purpose. The grievance of the petitioner-organization is

that the 5th respondent may not be in a position to pay up their wages and,

therefore, the contract should not be awarded to the 5th respondent.

W.P.(C).No.19329 of 2008-S – 2 –

3. In our opinion, in a petition, filed in the style of “public

interest litigation”, all these things cannot be looked into by this Court. If,

for any reason, the contractor does not pay the minimum wages to the

workmen of the petitioner-organization, if for any reason he engages them

for executing the work awarded by the awarder, they can go before the

appropriate forum and seek appropriate reliefs. In that view of the matter,

we decline to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition

requires to be rejected and it is rejected.

Ordered accordingly.

                                                      H.L.Dattu
                                                    Chief Justice




                                                     A.K.Basheer
vku/-                                                   Judge