NADUVELIPARAMBIL BIJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The same petitioner has been filed these four writ petitions, stating that he is running a Security Agency engaging ex- serviceman and asserting that his agency is validly licensed under the provisions of the Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act , 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for short). He says that the Controlling Authority under the Act has issued him the necessary license and he has produced a copy of the same on record in all these cases in substantiation of this.

(2.) The petitioner's grievance in these writ petitions is that even that being so, when the KSEB issued a notification calling for bids from agencies to provide them security personnel, they added a condition that only those agencies which are recognized by the 'Zila Sainik Board' or the 4th respondent - Sainik Welfare Directorate will be allowed to take part in the tender processes and he alleges that this runs contrary to the provisions of the aforementioned Act. He also has a case that neither the 'Zila Sainik Board' nor the Sainik Welfare Directorate are offering recognition to any security agency and therefore, that the condition imposed by the KSEB in their notification is impossible of performance. He has produced on record a letter issued by the Zila Sainik office to the above effect in evidence of his submission. He therefore, prays that his agency be allowed to take part in the tender processes and that the KSEB be directed to consider his bids along with that of the others.

(3.) I notice from the record that, by an interim order granted in these cases, the petitioner was allowed to participate in the tender process; however, subject to further orders from this Court.