IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 28035 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.SUPRAN, MINI BHAVAN, MADATHARA PO., KOLLAM, PIN-691541. BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN SRI.K.M.ANEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- HINDUSTAN NEWS PRINT LTD., NEWS PRINT NAGAR, KOTTAYAM, PIN-688 616. ADV. SRI.E.K.MADHAVAN FOR R1 SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA FOR R1 SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON FOR R1 SMT.UMA GOPINATH FOR R1 SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K FOR R1 GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).28035/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the first respondent. I have perused the statement filed on behalf of the respondent also. 2. Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P9 order issued by the first respondent rejecting the petitioner's request for a waiver of the penalty, imposed by the respondent, consequent upon the termination of the work originally entrusted to the petitioner and award of the same to another person. It is discernible from the statement that the balance work was entrusted to another contractor and was completed as well. Since the parties are governed by a contractual relationship, and in view of the fact that the balance work has already been completed by another contractor, I am of he view that the instant case is not a fit one to proceed with under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. W.P.(C).28035/2008 2 3. In the circumstances, writ petition is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to take appropriate action before the Civil Court. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs