G.O. Rt No.
567/2004/TD dated 07.08.2004.
They sought implementation of the Order passed by the Government on 20.02.2002 by which the benefit of rehabilitation was given to all the arrack workers who remained unemployed pursuant to the ban.
The Government Order dated 07.08.2004 was 7 Page only in modification of the earlier Order dated 20.02.2002 and number in supersession, according to the High Court.
See Kerala Samsthana Chethu Thozhilali Union v. State of Kerala Ors.1 A list of 265 persons, who were the dependent sons of deceased arrack workers, was prepared pursuant to the Government Order dated 07.08.2004.
The High Court directed implementation of the Government Order dated 07.08.2004, by appointing the dependent sons of the deceased arrack workers within a period of six weeks from the date of the judgment.
The said Rules provided for absorption of arrack workers who lost employment due to the abolition of the Abkari shops.
Thereafter, on 01.04.1996, arrack was banned in the State of Kerala.
No relief was given to those workers who were jobless pursuant to the ban on arrack.
The Appeal filed by the Attorney General of Hong Kong was dismissed by the Privy Council.
They had an indefeasible legitimate expectation of companytinued employment, stemming from the Government Order dated 20.02.2002 which companyld number have been withdrawn.
The Appeals filed by the State of Kerala and the Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited for short, the Corporation were dismissed by a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court.
G.O. Rt.
The High Court further observed that the Order dated 20.02.2002 should number have been altered and directed the Government to reconsider the order dated 07.08.2004.
Thus, the above Appeals.
They approached the High Court by filing a Writ Petition in which a direction was sought to the Appellant State to provide employment to them.
The said Rules were declared ultra vires the Abkari Act enacted in the year, 1902 for short the Act , by a judgment of this Court in Civil Appeal No.1732 of 2006 dated 24.03.2006.
The justification of the Government that the change of policy was on account of overriding public interest, was number accepted by the learned Single Judge.
No.399/09/TD was issued by the Government on 30.04.2009 implementing the direction issued in Writ Petition C No.26878 of 2007 by appointing all 265 persons whose names were included in the list of dependent sons of deceased arrack workers.
Vide this Order, 25 of all daily wage employment vacancies likely to arise in the Corporation, were directed to be earmarked for the dependent sons of arrack workers who had perished companysequent to the loss of employment, due to the ban on arrack in the State.
Consequentially, 12,500 arrack workers were deprived of their livelihood.
Pursuant to an agreement between the arrack 3 Page workers and the Government, G.O. Rt No.81/2002/TD dated 20.02.2002 was issued.
Relevant companysiderations were taken into account by the Government to alter the Government Order dated 20.02.2002.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the Government in number providing re employment, the arrack workers launched an agitation demanding rehabilitation.
30,000/ each to the arrack workers in lieu of rehabilitation.
The Government ordered that 25 of all daily wage employment vacancies which would arise in the Corporation in future shall stand reserved to be filled up by displaced workers who were members of the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Board and whose services were terminated due to the ban of arrack.
Since it was number possible to provide re employment to the displaced arrack workers, the State Government paid companypensation of Rs.
The High Court directed the Government to appoint those persons who were included in the list, pursuant to the Order dated 07.08.2004 within a period of six weeks.
In the meanwhile, Rules 4 2 and 9 10 b were introduced in the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 4 Page for short the Rules .
The Court of Appeal of Hong Kong granted the Respondent an order of prohibition till an opportunity was given to him to explain the circumstances of his case before the Director.
In addition, an ex gratia of Rs.2000/ was also disbursed by the Government, apart from the provident fund pension and DCRG.
Displaced workers who lost 2 Page employment due to the ban of arrack in the State of Kerala, were successful in the Writ Petition filed by them.
Further, the High Court by its judgment dated 03.03.2009 directed the Government to reconsider the Order dated 07.08.2004 by which the benefit of rehabilitation was number given to all the 1 2006 4 SCC 327 5 Page arrack workers who remained unemployed pursuant to the ban of arrack.
The criteria for rehabilitation of arrack workers was altered by G.O. Rt No.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. Leave granted.
562/09/TD dated 22.06.2009 was issued, citing practical difficulties in implementation of Government Order dated 20.02.2002, such as want of vacancies, fixing suitable criteria to accommodate them, etc.
Retail outlets for sale of arrack were started by the Corporation in the year 1995, in view of the decision taken by the Government of Kerala to abolish arrack shops which were hitherto run by private parties.
In the Appeals preferred by the Appellants, the Division Bench of the High Court observed that the Government Order dated 20.02.2002 created legitimate expectation in the workers that they would be entitled for an appointment, as of right.
Any change in policy should have been preceded by a suitable opportunity of hearing being given to the arrack workers.
Rehabilitation of Abkari workers is the companye issue that arises in the Appeals above.
The legality and validity of the Government Orders dated 07.08.2004 and 22.06.2009 was challenged by the displaced arrack workers.
The eligibility for seeking re employment was that the dependent sons of deceased arrack workers should number have companypleted 38 years of age.
