IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 5560 of 2008(J) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.T.SEETHI KOYA,THAZHAPUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE KARANTHOOR POST, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P RESPONDENTS: --------------------- - 1. SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE KOZHIKODE. 3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER P.W.D. BUILDINGS AND LOCAL WORKS NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE. 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER P.W.D. BUILDING DIVISION KOZHIKODE. 5. COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT KOZHIKODE. 6. V.P.MUHAMMED,TAJ MAHAL HOUSE KUNDAYITHODU, KOLATHARA.POST, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI FOR R6 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R1 TO 5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.5560/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 21.12.05. P2:- COPY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTION. P3:- COPY OF THE REQUEST DT. 16.12.06 SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE REQUEST DT. 18.7.07 SENT BY THE UNDER SECRETARY (FINANCE) TO THE COMMERCIAL TAX ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE. P5:- COPY OF THE BILL DT. 23.12.05. P6:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DT. 23.10.07 OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT. P7:- COPY OF THE REPORT DT. 29.9.07 BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (B) OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT. P8:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT. 25.9.07. P9:- COPY OF THE N.T.F. DEPARTMENT DT. 14.11.07 OF THE ENQUIRY NOTE BY THE FINANCE (INSPECTION WING). P10:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 4.12.07. P11:- COPY OF THE COMPLETION CERTIFICATE DT. 23.8.07. P12:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATION ON THE BACK SIDE OF EXT.P5. P13:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 15.12.07. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss V. GIRI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).5560 of 2008 J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P10 by which he has black listed and prevented from being awarded any contract. 2. In the counter affidavit, it is stated as follows: “On scrutiny of the part bills and the vouchers enclosed therein has found suspicious and hence requested to KGST Department for further verification and genuines of the bill. Meanwhile finance (Inspection Wing NTF) Department inspected the bill and verified along with KGST Department. After enquiry, the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance) reported that the bill in question (Ext.P5) was not issued by the dealer and it is fabricated and printed by the contractor himself and the same is a false document and suggested to take urgent action against the contractor as specified in Ext.P9. Since the work was awarded to the petitioner and he himself signed the agreement before the PWD authority to cary out the work according to the guidelines of PWD, and therefore the contractor colluded with Power of Attorney holder 6th respondent and made the fabricate documents to grab the public money, hence both are liable. W.P.(C).5560 of 2008 :: 2 :: It is submitted that petitioner has appointed a Power of Attorney V.P.Muhammed S/o.Ahammedkutty, the respondent No.6 in this writ petition © and executed the agreement thereto on 17th December, 2005. In the said agreement is specifically stated that “I hereby agree that all acts, deeds and things done by my said attorney shall be construed as acts, deeds and things done by me and I undertake to ratify and confirm all and whatsoever that my said attorney shall lawfully do or cause to be done for me by virtue of the powers hereby given.” In the above circumstance it is presumed that all acts done in this regard by the 6th respondent is with the concurrence of the petitioner, and the petitioner cannot be shirk his shoulders from the responsibility. It is submitted as instructed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance) necessary preventive measures has been ordered to kept in abeyance all the payment due to the petitioner and 6th respondent and not to award any other civil works to them until further orders. Since the petitioner and the 6th respondent are PWD contractors, they are bound to keep honest with the government. The action of making of fabricated documents and representing before the Government authority and acquiring public money without utilizing for the public interest, the motive of the petitioner and Power of Attorney is only making loss to the public W.P.(C).5560 of 2008 :: 3 :: exchequer. Only preventive action has been taken to safeguard the interest of the public and final action has not been taken so far. The petitioner filed a representation dtd. 15.12.07 this petition is under consideration as the enquiry is proceeding on the subject matter. Since the direction issued in Ext.P10 is only a preventive measure so as to safeguard the public exchequer and hence proper, legal, rational and according to natural justice. It is not at all an order of punishment. Ext.P10 order is only a conditional order which is subject to withdraw at the end of the enquiry of the issue and hence there is no need of affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Further agreement for the work is in the nature of the petitioner,he is legally bound to answer all the questions arises thereon. It is humbly prayed that the writ petition may dismissed with cost.” 3. In the circumstances, since an enquiry is being conducted into the allegations regarding fabrication of the documents, it is only appropriate that such enquiry is completed at the earliest. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to ensure that the enquiry conducted against the petitioner W.P.(C).5560 of 2008 :: 4 :: referred to above, is completed at the earliest, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. After the enquiry, if it is found that the allegations have not been proved, obviously, the order black listing the petitioner will not survive. It is open to the petitioner to seek payment of the amounts stated to be due to the petitioner for the work already completed. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE. sk/- //true copy//