IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19677 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHYAMALA SATHYAPALAN,AGED 68 YEARS W/O.LATE C.N.SATYAPALAN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU EZHUKONE, KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER ,PROJECT II OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PROJECT CIRCLE, PIRAVOM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 19677 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 24th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioner's late husband took on contract certain work on behalf of the respondents. After the death of her husband, the petitioner continued the work. According to the petitioner, the work was to be completed by 31-12-2008 and by that time the petitioner had completed 90% of the work. The petitioner would submit that for executing the balance work, clearance from Kerala State Electricity Board, P.W.D and Local Authority in respect of a 11 KV line is necessary. The same has to be obtained by the Irrigation Department. The petitioner also complains of non-supply of departmental materials by the respondents. Petitioner's part bills were also not honoured. The petitioner's request in this regard was not considered favourably. By Ext. P11, the petitioner has been directed to show cause why the contract should not be cancelled. The petitioner has filed Ext. P12 reply. According to the petitioner, even prior to that, the petitioner had submitted Ext. P10 representation in that regard. It is in the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent not to proceed with Ext. P11 till Ext. P10 and P12 requests are considered and appropriate orders are passed thereon. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext. P9 on merit and to pass appropriate orders therein with further direction to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P11 till a decision is taken by the Government. iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to pay and disburse the pending part bill of the petitioner. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. W.P.C. No. 19677/2010 -: 2 :- 3. I am of opinion that the 3rd respondent should consider Exts. P10 and P12 with the sympathy the petitioner deserves in view of the situation she is facing. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P.10 and P12 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.