IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 1135 of 2006(I) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- K.J.MATHEW, KACHAPPILLY HOUSE, MAIKAD.P.O, ANGAMALY. BY ADV. SRI.K.L.VARGHESE SMT.SANTHA VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PWD (R&B) CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALUVA-683 101. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/11/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 1185 OF 2006 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.1135/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 30.6.2005 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 12.7.05 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 17.11.05 ISSUED BY PETITIONER'S ADOCATES TO 2ND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 2.12.05 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER'S ADOCATES. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF SETTLEMENT OF THE LOK ADALATH HELD ON 10.12.05. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.1135 & 1185 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 5th November, 2008. J U D G M E N T Identical prayers are made in the writ petitions. The main prayer in W.P.(C) 1135/06 reads as follows :- “ Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling upon the second respondent to pay the balance amount due to the petitioner under the final bill in respect of the work done including release of security deposit with accrued interest after setting off the maximum liability of Rs.3,08,987/- within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.” It is submitted that the bill has not yet been settled. There will be a direction to the second respondent to settle the bills and after deducting the liability due from the petitioner as per Ext.P1, disburse the amounts if any due to the petitioner within one month from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. The question of interest is left open. Yet another grievance is with regard to the return of the security deposit. The contention raised by the petitioner is that once damages are realised from the petitioner, there is no justification in forfeiting the security. Reliance is placed on three decisions (two of the Supreme Court and one of this court); (1) Maula Bux v. Union of India (1969 WP NO.1135 & 1185/06 2 (2) SCC 554), (2) Union of India v. Rampur Distillery and Chemical Co. (1973) 1 SCC 649) and (3) Abdulla v. State of Kerala (2001(3) KLT 903). There will be a direction to the second respondent to take appropriate action in the matter of return of security deposit, in the light of the decisions referred to above with notice to the petitioner within one month from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.1135 & 1185 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 5th November, 2008.