IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16832 of 2010(D) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- K.MADHU,S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, VYSAKH, T.C.29/1656,PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANTHAPURAM-8., BY MR.SABU GEORGE, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT: ---------------- CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY MR.N. NANDAKUMARA MENON, (SR) FOR R1. MR. P.K. MANOJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16832 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is seeking for a direction to the respondent-Corporation to release the payment due to the petitioner with respect to the works done by him within a time frame. 2. The petitioner was awarded four items of work as described in paragraph 1 of the writ petition. He has completed the works numbered 1 and 2 therein on 27.02.2010, work No.3 on 16.03.2010 and work No.4 on 24.04.2010. It is pointed out that he had to invest Rs.40 lakhs for completing the said four items of work after availing a loan from the State Bank of Travancore, Kaithamukku branch. 3. The payment with respect to the contractors are concerned, it is covered by the directions issued in the judgment of this Court in W.A.No.263/1999. As per the same, the seniority has to be maintained by the Corporation on the basis of the date W.P.(C) No.16832/2010 2 of completion of the work. The draft seniority list was published including 157 bills as per Exhibit P2 and it is pointed out that the petitioner's name is not included therein. It is pointed out that the delay in the matter will adversely affect the petitioner as he has to clear the financial burden due to the Bank also. In these circumstances, the petitioner has submitted Exhibit P4 series of representation. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the Corporation submitted that as far as these four items of work are concerned, in respect of one of the items, the total expenses exceed the estimate rate and therefore it requires a further sanction and the petitioner will have to execute a supplementary agreement also with regard to two items of work. It is assured that the payments will be effected to the petitioner in terms of the date of completion of the work especially in compliance with the directions in Exhibit P1 judgment. It is only because of paucity of funds that the Corporation is not able to disburse the amount as sought for by the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the W.P.(C) No.16832/2010 3 petitioner has not received any communication so far from the Corporation requiring him to execute a supplementary agreement. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the Corporation that a communication will be issued immediately to the petitioner with regard to the items of work wherein the petitioner is required to execute a supplementary agreement. Learned counsel for the petitioner then prayed for a direction to the Corporation to pay the amount within the shortest possible time. There will be a direction to the respondent to disburse the amount covered by the bills in accordance with the seniority of the date of completion of the work, as expeditiously as possible, on completing all the required formalities. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp