IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 158 of 2009(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.18959/2008 Dated 30/09/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL SATHAR.A.M, S/O.MAMMUNHI HAJEE ERIYAL HOUSE, P.O.KOFLU, KASARAGODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SOHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- MR.RAMAKRISHNAN ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.W.D.ROAD SUB DIVISION, KASARAGOD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.PUSHPALATHA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- C.O.C.158/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Respondent has filed an affidavit. Paragraph 5 of the same reads as follows:- “The acceptance of the measurement was made by te contractor on 14.11.2008 in front of Assistant Engineer, Roads Section, Badiadka, with respect to this, Assistant Engineer respond to the contractor on 15.11.2008 for attending the office immediately for request of time extension. With respect to this, respondent also intimated to the contractor on 17.11.2008 for want of supplement agreement in favour of time of extension. But for this, the contractor did not respond till 3.12.2008. Viewing this, the Assistant Engineer, Roads Section, Badiadka reminded the matter to the petitioner once again on 4.12.2008 and simultaneously the respondent herein also reminded both about the want of extension of time and C.O.C.158/2009 2 supplement agreement on 6.12.2008. Till this date, the contractor has not responded for clearing all these. Without the time of extension and supplement agreement, the bill cannot be submitted as per clause in between the petitioner and agreement authority. In that circumstances, it is very difficult for the respondent herein to comply with the directions of this Honourable Court. As and when time of extension and supplement agreement are produced the directions contained in the judgment can be complied. Therefore, the respondent not committed any contempt of Court as alleged by the petitioner herein.” 2. I heard Mr.K.V.Sohan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Pushpalatha, learned Government Pleader. 3. It is made clear that the petitioner may execute a supplementary agreement with the respondent and any application for extension of time that the petitioner may make in this regard, for the purpose of settling the issue, shall not be treated as the basis for imposing any C.O.C.158/2009 3 penalty on the petitioner. Supplementary agreement shall be executed within three days from the date on which the petitioner submits his willingness to do so in writing. It is made clear that the payment due to the petitioner shall be effected keeping in mind the time frame fixed in the judgment. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all persons who come below the petitioner in the list of priority maintained in the office of the Assistant Executive Engineer, have also been paid. If that be so, there should be no further delay in releasing the payment due to the petitioner, after the execution of the supplementary agreement and passing of the bill. At any rate, the process shall be completed within one month from the date on which the supplementary agreement is executed. Subject to the above, Contempt of Court case is closed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs