IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2010 / 14TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 30373 of 2009(S) -------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. PERINGATHUR-KANJIRAKADAVU ROAD, SARVAKAKSHI ACTION COMMITTEE, KARIYAD P.O., 673 316, KANNUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS CONVENOR, SRI.C.V.NANU, 65 YEARS, S/O.KUNHUKUTTY, RESIDING AT CHAKKERIVEETTIL, KARIYAD P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. V.P.RAJAN, S/O.KANNAN, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT VADAKKE PUNATHUNNEL, KARIYAD P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.W.D.ROADS AND BRIDGES NORTH CIRCLE, CALICUT. 3. THE DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. MOHAMMED JANISH, PWD CONTRACTOR, JASMINE HOUSE, P.O.THEKKIL, KASARAGOD. WP(C) NO.30373 OF 2009 - 2 - ADDL.5. HAMEED KIDANHI, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.MAMMAD, KIDANHI P.O., KANNUR DIST. (ADDL.5TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 1.6.2010 IN I.A.NO.5100 OF 2010) R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN FOR R4 SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.N.Ravindran, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.30373 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT Ravindran, J. This writ petition is filed as a public interest litigation seeking the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the third respondent to conduct a vigilance enquiry into the misappropriation of funds during the renovation of the Peringathur-Kanjirakadavu Road undertaken in 2008-2009; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the second respondent to require the fourth respondent to execute the renovation works in strict compliance of all the requirements of Exhibit P1 without any further remuneration” 2. The instant writ petition arises out of the renovation work of Peringathur - Kanjirakadavu Road undertaken during the year 2008-09. The 4th respondent was the contractor to whom the WP(C) No.30373 of 2009 - 2 - work was awarded. When the writ petition came up for hearing after notice to the respondents, a Division Bench of this Court by order passed on 25th January, 2010 directed the Chairman of the Taluk Legal Services Committee, Kannur to look into the grievances voiced by the petitioners, conduct a site inspection and submit a report to this Court. The Chairman of the Taluk Legal Services Committee, Kannur has pursuant to the said direction inspected the road and submitted a report. The said report came up for consideration of this Court on 2.7.2010. On that day we directed the learned Government Pleader to get instructions from the official respondents and to file a statement with reference to the report submitted by the Chairman of the Taluk Legal Services Committee. The second respondent has pursuant to the said direction filed a statement dated 30th July, 2010. In the said statement the second respondent has stated that the various defects noticed by the Chairman of the Taluk Legal Services Committee, Kannur will be rectified by the 4th respondent contractor as soon as the Monsoon is over and that WP(C) No.30373 of 2009 - 3 - the drainage work can be taken up only after the land owners on either side of the road surrender their lands free of cost. It is also stated that though initially the landowners on either side of the road had offered sufficient land for constructing the drainage free of cost, subsequently they withdrew from their promise. 3. We heard Smt.Sumathy Dandapani, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners, Sri.Benny Gervasis, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and Sri.T.G.Rajendran, the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent contractor. We have also considered the pleadings and the materials on record. The statement dated 30.7.2010 filed by the second respondent discloses that the petitioners in the instant writ petition were also agreeable to the suggestion of the contractor as regards the rectification of the defects pointed out by the Chairman of the Taluk Legal Services Committee, Kannur. The statement further discloses that the official respondents have already issued directions to the 4th respondent contractor and the subordinate WP(C) No.30373 of 2009 - 4 - officers in the department to rectify the defects pointed out by the Chairman of the Taluk Legal Services Committee. In our opinion, in view of the stand taken by the official respondents and the contractor the petitioners' grievances stand redressed. We accordingly dispose of the wit petition recording the statement dated 30.7.2010 filed by the second respondent and the assurances contained therein. If within a period of six months from today the works referred to in the statement dated 30.7.2010 are not carried out, it will be open to the petitioners to move this Court afresh seeking appropriate reliefs. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.N.Ravindran, Judge vns