IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2301 of 2011(K) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- T.S.VIJAYAKUMAR, INCHOOR, VARAPETTY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE KOTHAMANGALAM BLOCK PANCHAYATH, KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LSGD, KOTHAMANGALAM BLOCK, KOTHAMANGALAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kp C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 2301 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who was the convener of Project No.3118/10 of Kothamangalam Block Panchayath filed this writ petition mainly seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the tender excess to the petitioner in respect of the construction of Anganwadi building at Inchoor in Varappetty Panchayath in terms of Ext.P2 Government Order and Ext.P3 resolution. The committee under the convenorship of the petitioner had undertaken construction of an Anganwadi under 'Jankeeyasoothranam 2009-10'. Subsequently, they have submitted Ext.P1 estimate report. Contending that in terms of Ext.P2 Government Order dated 22.2.2010, they are entitled to get the tender excess amount, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation demanding payment of 20% tender excess as envisaged in Ext.P2. Despite the receipt of Ext.P4 the second respondent is not taking any action thereon. It is to redress the said grievance that this writ petition has been filed. Considering WPC.No.2301/2011 : 2 : the fact that Ext.P4 representation is pending consideration before the second respondent, I do not think it necessary to consider the contention on merits at this stage. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge