IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 19504 of 2007(V)
1. THE CALICUT CONSTRUCTION LABOUR CONTRACT
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent
2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.SASINDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :26/06/2007
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J
----------------------------
W.P.(C).No. 19504/2007
-----------------------------
Dated this 26th day of June, 2007
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as
also the Government Pleader.
2. The petitioner is a Labour Contract of Co-
operative Society. As per the Ext.P1 Government Order,
they are entitled to preference in the matter of award of
contract works. However, for that purpose they have to
furnish a certificate issued by the first respondent
regarding the ‘work-in-hand’ of the petitioner, Society.
Now notifications inviting tenders have been issued.
However, since the first respondent is not issuing ‘work-in-
hand’ certificate the petitioner is prejudiced in the matter
of submission of tenders.
3. In the above circumstances the petitioner seeks
the following reliefs:-
(i). Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ
order direction to the first respondent to issue the
‘work-in-hand’ certificate as requested in Ext.P11 to
W.P.(C).19504/2007
2
the petitioner forthwith for participating in the
Ext.P9 and P10 tender proceedings.
(ii). To declare that the first respondent is
duty bound to issued the ‘work-in-hand’ certificate
on getting the application from a co-operative
society, as contemplated in Ext.P1 Government
order without delay.
(iii). To direct the second respondent to
conduct an enquiry against the first respondent for
the delay in issuing the ‘work-in-hand’ certificate to
the petitioner co-operative society which resulted in
make the society unable to participate the tender
proceedings.
4. After hearing both sides, I dispose of this writ
petition with the following directions:-
The first respondent is directed to consider Ext.P11
application of the petitioner for issue of ‘work-in-hand’
certificate as expeditiously as possible at any rate within
two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. In the meanwhile, the respondents 3 and 4
shall allow the petitioner to participate in the tender
W.P.(C).19504/2007
3
notified as per Exts.P9 and P10 without insisting on
production of work-in-hand certificate. However, if the
tenders are awarded to the petitioner, the petitioner
need to be allowed to sign the agreement only after the
production of the ‘work-in-hand’ certificate.
The W.P.(C) is disposed of as above.
S.SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE
mrcs