High Court of KeralaWP(C)/26866/2014dismissed

Kerala Sericulture Farmers Association v. Union Of India

2015-04-10Honourable Mr.Justice A.M.Shaffique4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/20TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 26866 of 2014 (G) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

--------------- KERALA SERICULTURE FARMERS ASSOCIATION PUZHAKKAL, KANNADI P.O PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN 678 701 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY K SASIDHARAN BY ADVS.SRI.B.PRAMOD SRI.S.K.SAJI RESPONDENT(S):

--------------

1. UNION OF INDIA REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF TEXTILES NEW DLHI

2. CENTRAL SILK BOARD, CSB COMPLEX, BTM LAYOUT, MADIVALA BANGALURU 560 068 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN

3. THE CEO AND MEMBER SECRETARY CENTRAL SILK BOARD, CSB COMPLEX, BTM LAYPOUT MADIVALA, BANGALURU 560 068

4. COMMISSIONER RURAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONARATE, LMS COMPOUND VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

5. THE SCIENTIST-C-IN-CHARGE, RESEARCH EXTENSION CENTRE(SUB UNIT) CENTRAL SILK BOARD, PADAMPRABHA ROAD, KALPETTA WAYAND PIN 673 121 R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.A.MOHAMMED SAVAD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 26866 of 2014 (G) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF BRANCHES OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

IN THE STATE OF KERALA

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF SERICULTURE FARMERS IN THE DISTRICT OF WAYANAD EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 29-09-2014 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ EXT.R2(a):

TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE ON CLUSTER APPROACH.

EXT.R2(b):

TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE PRODUCTION DETAILS OF RESEARCH EXTENSION CONTRES (SUB-UNIT) AT KALPETTA FOR THE YEARS 2010-2011 TO 2014-2015.

EXT.R49a):

TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(Rt) No.2267/13/LSGD DATED 6.9.2013. EXT.R4(b):

TRUE COPY OF THE BROCHURE ON SERICULTURE PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.26866 of 2014 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of April, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the respondents not to close down/shift the CSB Research Extension Centre (Sub-Unit) at Kalpetta and for a further direction to take all necessary measures for the effective functioning of the said unit at Kalpetta. Petitioner claiming to be an association of farmers, a registered body, submits that there are 42 well established sericulture farmers in Wayanad district and for helping such farmers a Research Extension Centre (Sub-Unit) was established at Kalpetta. Petitioner's complaint is regarding a decision taken to close down the said Research Extension Centre and hence, after having given a representation, this writ petition is filed.

2. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 2, 3 and 5 indicating that the centre at Kalpetta was functioning since 2010-2011 to 2014-2015. Over a period of time, the farmers have decreased from 58 to 18 in 2013-14 and

W.P.(C) No.26866/2014 on account of such decrease in number of farmers, the activity of the Research Extension Centre has come down and the staff were under utilised. Accordingly, it was decided to close down the said Sub-unit and the farmers shall have all facilities from the Research Extension Centre at Palakkad.

3. Having regard to the aforesaid submission, I do not think that this Court will be justified in interfering with the decision of the respondents to wind up the activities of Research Extension Centre. The learned counsel for the petitioner however points out that by virtue of letter dated 12.12.2014, the Central Sericulture Research and Training Institute had implemented the Sansad Adarsh Grama Yojana in which Wayanad district is also included. Whatever that might be, having regard to the fact that the respondent authorities have decided to shift the Research Extension Centre, this Court cannot direct that it should not be done.

In the result, I do not find any merit in the above writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE vdv