Under challenge in this writ petition is the proposal of the second respondent to shift the present ex-servicemen canteen from Poothole to a rented building at Kuttanellur. 2. The first petitioner is an organisation which is formed to protect the interest of the ex-servicemen. It is recognised by the Union as well as the State Government.
3. The petitioner alleges that there is an ex- servicemen canteen under the canteen stores department which is functioning at Poothole near the railway station and KSRTC Bus Stand at Thrissur.
4. The petitioner alleges that the location of the said canteen is very convenient for ex-service men and their dependents. Knowing that there was a proposal to shift the said canteen to a rented building at Kuttanellur, the petitioner represented against the same. However, the petitioner was served with Ext.P2 wherein the second respondent confirmed that the canteen is proposed to be shifted at Kuttanellur. According to the petitioner, it is stated in the reply that a building for ECHS Polyclinic is proposed to be constructed by the respondents, Thrissur and therefore, it would be in the interest of the ex-servicemen to have both the ECHS Polyclinic as well as the canteen at one place. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.
5. As directed by this Court on 19.12.2013, the respondents filed a statement in which it is stated that there was a proposal for construction of a permanent building of ECHS Polyclinic, Kuttanellur and it was the decision of the Army authorities to ensure that all the facilities offered to ex-
servicemen are available in the same place and therefore the proposal was to locate both the canteen as well as the ECHS polyclinic at the same location and create ESM welfare facilities.
6. It was further contended that the proposal for shifting was blindly and baselessly resisted by the petitioners based on sentiments and it is not legally sustainable. It was further contended that the Government of Kerala already allotted 25 cents of revenue land at Kuttanellur comprised under Ollur Village. At the time of filing the counter, the construction of the building was in full swing.
7. Today when the matter came up for hearing, the learned standing counsel for the respondents would submit that the construction of the building has been completed.
8. Arguments have been heard.
9. The respondents have produced Ext.R1 series photographs which gives an idea of the present location. At the time of the argument the photographs of the existing canteen at Poothole was also produced. A comparison of photographs shows that the building at Poothole does not have sufficient space for vehicle parking. It is also submitted that it does not have toilet and drinking water facilities.
10. It appears that the scope of future expansion of the canteen complex is limited due to non-availability of covered area and open space at Poothole. Due to restriction of limited space, only two or three grocery counters are operative in the existing building. However, on the other hand, the proposed new complex has approximately 8,000 sq.ft. covered area and 10,000 sq.ft. open area. There is no civilian complex adjacent to the proposed site which gives inherent security. It is in close proximity to the proposed new ECHS polyclinic. Adequate parking toilet and drinking water facilities are there in the new complex. The site is well connected with public conveyance system. It is also pointed out that the proposed site will have more billing counters thereby minimising waiting time for ex-servicemen who are aged above 60 to 70 years.
As rightly pointed out by the learned standing counsel for the respondents that it is the sole prerogative of General Officer Commanding, Andhra, Tamilnadu, Karnataka and Kerala (GOC, ATNK & K Area) to decide on the issues relating to welfare of ESM fraternity. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the proposed shifting. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed.
sd/-A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE css/ TRUE COPY p.s.to judge