High Court Kerala High Court

Jidhin M.R vs The Secretary on 2 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
Jidhin M.R vs The Secretary on 2 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18984 of 2010(W)


1. JIDHIN M.R, S/O.MADHUSUDHANAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SECRETARY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :02/09/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
              --------------------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) NO.18984 OF 2010(W)
              --------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner submits that as a Contractor he has been

executing works in the Irrigation Department. It is stated that he

applied for B. Class Contractor’s licence. According to the

petitioner, although he satisfied all the conditions for grant of the

said licence, respondents have asked him to produce documents

evidencing ownership and possession of property worth Rs.45

lakhs. It is thereupon that the writ petition is filed challenging the

said demand made by the respondents.

2. A statement has been filed by the Government Pleader

on behalf of the respondents, producing Annexure-R1(a) Rules for

Registration for contractors executing works in the PWD. It is

stated that as per the Rules of Registration, the application for

registration should be supported by details of financial stability

and the registering authority has to satisfy himself about the

financial capacity of the applicant. It is stated that Registration

enables the Contractor to tender works up to 55 lakhs and that it

was therefore in order to satisfy the financial stability of the

WPC.No.18984 /2010
:2 :

applicant, the document was sought for.

3. If financial stability is one of the criteria to be proved

by the applicant and to be satisfied by the Registering Authority,

this court will not be justified in finding fault with the Registering

Authority, when it calls upon the applicant to produce documents

supporting his claim that he has financial stability. Therefore I do

not find anything illegal in it warranting interference.

Writ Petition fails and is dismissed.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/