Kerala High Court
Joju K.J vs Kerala State Beverages Corporation on 6 February, 2024
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 40972/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 1, 5, 7 & 9-12:
1 JOJU K.J
S/O JOSHY.P.K, NEDUMPILLIL HOUSE,SOUTH PARAVOOR
P.O.,POOTHOTTA, ERNAKULAM.
2 SHANIL K.V
KOROTH HOUSE, VARAM P.O, KANNUR-670594.
3 GIREESH
VELUTHETHODI HOUSE, ERATHI MANGAD P.O,NILAMBUR,
MANNUPADAM, MALAPPURAM-679343.
4 JAYAPRASAD.T
POOVADIYIL HOUSE, CHERIYELA, ALUMOOD P.O., KOLLAM.
5 P.P. SANOOJ
PUNNAKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,VILAYOOR P.O, PATTAMBI,
PALAKKAD-679309.
6 SREEJITH
PATHIRIKKADU HOUSE, CHEMMATHIRIKADU P.O,MALAPPURAM-
679325.
7 MANU. S.NAIR
NADUKKEULIYIL HOUSE, THEKKETHU KAVALA P.O.,CHIRAKADAVU
KAVAL P.O,. CHIRAKADAVU, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686519.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.A.SHAJI (SR.)
SRI.S.ABHILASH VISHNU
SRI.ATHUL SHAJI
KUM.NAIR ANUJA GOPALAN
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
2
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WP(C):
1 KERALA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION
LIMITED. BEVCO TOWER, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O,PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010,REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2 THE CHIEF WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR
KERALA ABKARI WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KCP
BUILDINGS, ARYASALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695036
3 KERALA ABKARI WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR,KCP
BUILDINGS, ARYASALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695036.
4 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPRATMENT OF LABOUR AND REHABILITATIONSECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAMPIN-695001.
5 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT.,TAXES
DEPARTMENT, GOVT.OF KERALA,SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
BY ADV SRI.NAVEEN.T., SC, KERALA STATE BEV.CO. M.
AND M.
OTHER PRESENT:
SR GP SRI BIMAL K NATH
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
3
JUDGMENT
Amit Rawal, J.
Present intra court appeal is preferred against the
judgment of the Single Bench whereby the benefit of scheme
dated 7.8.2004 promulgated by the Government has been
extended to petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 14 and denied the
appellants ie., petitioners Nos. 1, 5, 7 and 9-12.
2. The State of Kerala on 1.4.1996 imposed a ban for
sale of arrack in the State which lead to deprivation of
livelihood, of approximately 12,500 arrack workers. In lieu of
rehabilitation, certain workers were given compensation in
terms of money and exgratia. But the demand of the displaced
arrack workers for rehabilitation kept on knocking the door of
the Government which led to a promulgation of a scheme /
order dated 20.2.2002. The said order was assailed in this
Court vide W.P.(C) No.19204 of 2005 and connected cases.
Vide judgment dated 29.5.2015, the claim of the abkari
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
workers who were covered by the Government order dated
20.2.2002 was upheld. The Division Bench also affirmed the
judgment of the Single Bench. State of Kerala filed an appeal
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Supreme Court in its
reported judgment in Kerala State Beverages (M and M)
Corporation Ltd. & Ors. v. P.P Suresh and Ors. (2019 (9) SCC
710) allowed the appeals and held that the order dated
20.2.2002 has been replaced by order dated 7.8.2004 and
therefore, the claim of abkari workers based on the previous
government order was untenbale.
3. Ext.P1 Government order dated 7.8.2004 reads
thus:
Government as per order first read above, ordered that 25% of
all daily wage employment vacancies arising in the Kerala State
Beverages Corporation in future should stand reserved to be
filled up by the abkari workers registered with the Kerala
Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Board who were terminated from
service due to arrack ban with effect from 1.1.1996. Though
certain daily wage vacancies were reserved reserved for the ex-
abkari workers, these vacancies could not be filled up, as a list
of eligible workers was not made available to the KSBC. This
issue was subjected to detailed discussion in the meeting held
by the Chief Minister on 22.10.2003. It was therein decided to
fix new criteria for the rehabilitation of abkari workers and to
fill up the vacancies reserved for them in future based on the
revised criteria.
Government have examined the issue in detail and are pleased
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
to order that 25% of all daily wage employment vacancies
arising in the Kerala State Beverages Corporation should be
earmarked for the dependent sons of arrack workers who had
perished consequent on the loss of employment due to the ban
on arrack in the State and if such claimants are more than the
available number of vacancies, selection will be made from
among them, subject to following conditions:
(1) Only the dependent son who has not completed 38 years of
age will be eligible.
(2) The consent letter of the wife of the deceased and the
FIR/Death Certificate also be submitted along with the
application.
A list of eligible abkari workers prepared on the basis of the
above guideline shall be made available to the KSBC by the
Chief Welfare Fund Inspector, the Kerala Abkari Workers
Welfare Fund Board to fill up the vacancies. The order read as
first paper above will stand modified to this extent.
4. Applications of the workers, who had already
applied or after promulgation of the scheme, were processed
by the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Board and
submitted to the Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and
Marketing) Corporation Ltd. (BEVCO) in terms of the scheme
ie., 25% of the vacancies were ordered to be kept reserved in
the BEVCO. Certain other dependents of Abkari and arrack
workers like the petitioners submitted application on different
dates, which is tabulated herein below:
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
Sl.No. Name Date of Birth Date of Date of death
Application of the
employee
1 Joju K.J 26/03/84 01/07/09 15/03/06
2 Krishna Kumar K 06/05/87 06/08/05 04/04/97
3 Sandeep A.M 25/05/87 26/12/03 13/03/00
4 Antony C Johnson 18/05/66 31/05/12 02/06/00
5 Shanil K.V 01/06/84 06/05/13 23/10/01
6 Shalan S.K 25/05/80 Not known 23/11/01
7 Gireesh 21/10/85 29/05/09 21/06/02
8 Anil S 01/04/78 Not known 09/03/04
9 Jayaprasad T 05/04/76 Not known 11/04/07
0 P.P Sanooj 28/03/83 22/12/09 12/08/07
11 Sreejith 01/10/83 25/09/09 09/01/08
12 Manu S Nair 22/08/89 07/12/11 04/06/08
13 Reghulal R 20/05/74 Not known 04/12/08
14 Ravikanth 18/01/89 Not known 10/06/02
5. Vide Ext.P5 dated 1.8.2013 considering various
judgments of this Court in different matters, Government
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
modified the order. In order to prevent the spate of
applications, modified the scheme dated 7.8.2004 by terming it
to be a one time employment scheme. In the meantime, the
applicants who had submitted applications much later, as
indicated above, to the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund
Board, were forwarded to the BEVCO on 12.8.2013.
6. On noticing that there is already a modification in
the original promulgated scheme, Government vide order
dated 16.11.2016 cancelled the list of 75 persons. Petitioners,
in 2018 staked the claim in this Court for issuance of directions
to the respondents to consider the applications without laying
challenge to the order dated 16.11.2016.
7. The stand of the BEVCO before the Single Bench was
in tandem with the aforementioned facts with a further
objection that the writ petition in the absence of any challenge
to the order dated 16.11.2016 was not untenable.
8. Learned Single Bench vide impugned judgment
considering all those facts rejected the claim of the appellants
ie., petitioners 1, 5, 7 and 9-12 and granted the relief to 2, 3
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
and 14 on the premise that the said petitioners were minors at
the time when the modification was caused and therefore they
would not be hit by the Government order dated 1.8.2013,
Ext.P5 but would be covered under the originally promulgated
scheme dated 7.8.2004.
9. BEVCO assailed the judgment of the Single Bench
qua the extension of benefit to the petitioners 2, 3 and 14 vide
W.A No.1884 of 2018.
10. Division Bench of this Court modified the order of
the Single Bench by relegating the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 14
to approach the Government with the details of their date of
birth, the date of death of the abkari workers and also the date
of their application in terms of the scheme and on submission
of those documents, Government shall examine and take an
appropriate decision, in accordance with law. The denial of
the reliefs to other petitioners has led to filing of the intra
court appeal.
11. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants, in support of the memorandum of appeal submitted
that the modification of the scheme was caused on 1.8.2013
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
but the applications were submitted much before as evident
from the table extracted above. At least said
applicants/dependents could have been considered in terms of
the scheme.
12. The act of the Government Ext.P5 is hit by doctrine
akin to promissory estoppel as the tenor and mode of the
scheme Ext.P1 do not restrict its applicability rather it was to
be made applicable till the cessation of the list of dependants
in view of the expression used 'in future'. There was no
limitation for submission of the application for the cause of
action is recurring and the benefit extended to other persons
would result into dichotomous approach much less
discrimination as envisaged under Article 14 of the
Constitution of India and also deprivation of livelihood
provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
13. Learned counsel appearing for the BEVCO countered
the arguments on the premise that in the absence of any
challenge to the order dated 16.11.2016, R1(a) cancelling the
list of 75 persons including that of the petitioners, appeal
would not be maintainable. In fact the petitioners if at all were
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
aggrieved could have assailed the said order without wastage
of time but kept silent for almost two years and staked the
claim of employment on the basis of the scheme, which was
already modified. In case the request of the petitioners is
accepted, there would be no end to claim on behalf of similarly
situated persons and the process would continue for infinite
period.
14. Counsel for the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund
Board adopts the argument of the counsel for the BEVCO.
15. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and appraised the paper book. Claim in the instant writ
petition on behalf of the petitioners was as under:
1. Issue of writ of certiorari quashing the original of Exhibit-
P5:
2. Declare that the petitioners are entitled to be appointed as
Abkari worker as against 25% of the daily wage employment
vacancies earmarked for the dependent sons of Abkari workers
in accordance with the scheme formulated by the Government:
3. issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2
to engage the petitioners on daily wage basis in the service of
the 1st respondent as Abkari workers as against 25% of the
daily wage employment vacancies earmarked for the dependent
sons of Abkari workers in accordance with the scheme
formulated by the Government.
WA NO. 720 OF 2018
16. No challenge has been laid to the order dated
16.11.2016. There was some force in the argument regarding
the submission of the applications much before the
Government order dated 1.8.2013 but in view of the
cancellation of the list, their argument cannot be
countenanced. The tabulated chart extracted above would
reveal that applicants/appellants/petitioners/ were not diligent
for making the claim in terms of the scheme much less no
explanation has comeforth. Single Bench in our considered
view has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioners. We do
not find any illegality or perversity. Writ appeal is
dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
sab C.S. SUDHA
JUDGE
