KRISHNAN KAKKANTH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In O.P. Nos. 13936 and 14454 of 1995, petitioners challenge Ext.P5 circular issued by the Kannur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. which required that the Rubber Sheeting Rollers shall be purchased only from Regional Agro-Industries Development Corporation Ltd. as a precondition for disbursement of loan. In O.P. No. 16115 of 1995, petitioner challenges the Government Order, dated 19-9-1995 which states that for the distribution of pump sets under the Comprehensive Coconut Development Programme, pump sets shall be supplied by the Kerala Agro-Industries Corporation and Regional Agro-Industries Development Corporation in the district of Kannur, Wyanad, Kozhikode, Malappuram, Palakkad, Thrissur and Kottayam. The facts in O.P. No. 13936 of 1995 and O.P.No.14454 of 1995 are similar. In both cases, petitioners are agriculturists engaged in the cultivation of rubber, coconuts and other cash crops. Petitioners anti similarly placed agriculturists have availed loans for the purpose of cultivation. There are various schemes formulated by the State owned financial institutions to provide short term loan to agriculturists. By using these loans, agriculturists purchased good quality agro-machineries and accessories at competitive prices. In 1993, the District Co-operative Bank took a decision to give incentives to agriculturists to purchase Rubber Sheeting Rollers from Regional Agro-Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (for short 'RAIDCO'). But, later this scheme was withdrawn. RAIDCO is only a Co-operative Society dealing in agro-machineries. It does not have many outlets or distributors. Petitioners allege that at the instance of the Kannur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. it was decided that whenever loans are distributed it should be with a condition that whatever machinery is required for the purpose for which loan is sanctioned should be purchased from RAIDCO. Other agro-machinery dealers challenged this circular and it was held in O.P. No. 9628 of 1989 that the circular was discriminatory. This circular was withdrawn by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. However, again a decision was taken to favour the 3rd respondent. This again was challenged before this Court but the original petition was dismissed. According to the petitioners, any order conferring special treatment to RAIDCO is illegal as it is violative of the fundamental rights of other dealers. It is further contended that these petitioners approached the District Co-operative Bank in the Kannur District to avail loan for the purchase of Rubber Sheeting Rollers and the petitioners were directed that the Rubber Sheeting Rollers shall be purchased from RAIDCO. This, according to the petitioners, is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of the petitioners' right to equality, freedom of choice and freedom of liberty. According to the petitioner, that condition stipulated in Ext.P5 circular to purchase Rubber Sheeting Rollers from particular Co-operative Societies is against the orders of this Court.

(2.) In O.P. No. 16115 of 1995, the matter relates to the purchase of pumpsets. Petitioner therein is a dealer in agro-machinery and he is having a shop at Kanhangad in Kasaragod district. Petitioner is also the President of the Kerala Agro-machinery Dealers Association. It is contended that there are 550 private dealers. RAIDCO formed Co-operative Societies in the northern district of Kerala. They are also dealers in agricultural pumpsets, implements and agro-machineries. RAIDCO has got only 25 outlets allover Kerala. So also Kerala Agro-Industries Corporation Ltd. (for short 'KAICO') which is a Government of Kerala undertaking, has only 11 outlets allover Kerala. Various schemes either sponsored by the Central Government or State Governments are implemented for the development of agriculture. As part of this scheme, Government of Kerala has decided to implement a scheme known as Comprehensive Coconut Development Programme (C.C.D.P.). Under this scheme subsidies are to be provided for tube-wells, open dug wells, pumpsets, group irrigation, green manure, copra drier etc. The scheme proposes to provide irrigation facilities by subsidisirig construction of wells and installation of pumpsets. In the northern districts, these pumpsets are being supplied by KAICO and when the petitioner made enquiry it was understood that the Government issued order No. G.O.(Rt) 1310/95/AD, dated 19-9-1995 to the effect that in the, districts of Kasaragod, Kannur, Wyanad, Kozhlkode, Malappuram, Palakkad, Thrissur and Kottayam the supply of pumpsets shall be exclusively made by RAIDCO and KAICO. Petitioner contends that Ext.P7 Government Order is highly illegal, totally arbitrary and absolutely without any jurisdiction. It is contended that it is violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner.

(3.) First respondent in O.P. No. 16115 of 1995 has filed a counter-affidavit supporting the Government order. It is contended that the Government order was issued under Art.162 of the Constitution and there is no discrimination by issuing such order since the State Government have power to give preferential treatment to Co-operative Societies and the Government Corporations. It is submitted that it is the duty of the Government to promote the activities of the Co-operative Societies as well as that of public sector undertakings in the matter of purchase of pumpsets. This order was issued on the basis of well planned scheme prepared after consultation with highly technical bodies. The orders were issued as under the policy decision of the Government and after high level discussions and deliberations considering all aspects. It is to ensure good quality pumpsets and proper after sales service especially to undertakings which are well-equipped and well-managed.