IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2011 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 11394 of 2011(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SYED MUHAMMED P.K., AGED 41, S/O.KUNJU MUHAMMED, PULIYAMPALLI HOUSE, PANANGAD, PANANGAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 506. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM, SRI.UDAYAKUMAR SREEDHARAN. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.W.D.(R&B), CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALUVA, PIN-683 101. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO.11394 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2011. JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is as follows: By Ext.P1, petitioner was given the right to collect toll from Kolencherykadavu Bridge for the period from 1.4.2010 to 31.3.2011. However, in view of the press report vide Ext.P3, the motor vehicles passing though the bridge refused to pay the toll from 26.1.2011. Petitioner sustained huge loss on account of the same. The respondent also did not clarify, nor did help the petitioner to enforce the toll collection. In the circumstances, petitioner submitted Ext.P6 requesting the respondent to exempt him from toll collection and to compensate for the loss sustained in the toll collection after 26.1.2011. Petitioner requested for refund of the security deposit and also the loss of toll sustained by him due to repair works from 19.1.2011 to 22.1.2011 as recommended in Ext.P2 by the Executive Engineer. The respondent is still to consider Ext.P6 taking into account Ext.P2, P3 and P5 and pass orders expeditiously, lest serious injury should be caused to the petitioner by way of interest on the loan availed by him for the work. W.P.(C). NO.11394 OF 2011 2 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the respondent to consider and finalise Ext.P6 in accordance with law. 4. After hearing both sides, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent to consider and finalise Ext.P6 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law in the light of Exts.P2, P3 and P5 and such other relevant materials, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the respondent for further steps. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. mns