IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5334 of 2011(N) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.T. THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS, PURAYIDATHIL HOUSE, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.REJI GEORGE, SRI.RAJEEV P.NAIR, SMT.MANJU RAJAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT GOVT. OF KERALA, L.M.S.COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 3. THE PROJECT OFFICER, DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL ENGINEER PHONES (GROUPS), BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED (BSNL) PONKUNNAM - 686 506. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P. NARAYANAN. R4 BY ADV. MR.MATHEWS K.PHILIP, SC, BSNL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.5334 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of February 2011 JUDGMENT The basic issue involved in this Writ Petition is as to the alleged liability of the petitioner to satisfy 'damages' to the B.S.N.L. In the course of the proceedings involving the dispute, the matter was brought up for consideration before this Court at the instance of the petitioner earlier, by filing W.P.(C) No.3747/2008, which culminated in Ext.P9 judgment, whereby this Court directed the Govt. to re-consider the matter through a 'tripartite meeting' after holding that the course pursued by the Govt. earlier by way of 'adjudicating' the issue was not in conformity with the direction given by this Court. Pursuant to the above verdict, the matter was considered by the Govt. and Ext.P10 order has been passed, fixing the liability on the petitioner as Rs.4,20,463/-, to be paid to the B.S.N.L; which forms the subject matter in the Writ Petition. W.P.(C) No. 5334/2011 - 2 - 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Govt. has taken the same turn, which was deprecated by this Court in Ext.P9 judgment, whereby it was held that the scope of the judgment/direction given by this Court was not to 'adjudicate' the issue at the hands of the Govt. but to convene a tripartite proceeding and to have a solution. 3. The learned counsel further submits that the issue is actually pending consideration before the competent Civil Court in O.S No.630/2008 (Additional Sub Court, Kottayam) and since the proceedings before the Govt. did not come to be settled, the petitioner is very much entitled to pursue the matter before the Civil Court. 4. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for B.S.N.L and the Govt. Pleader for the other respondents. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the Govt. was only having the role of a mediator or moderator in the above proceedings, more so; when the effect of Ext.P9 verdict was that, it did not involve or contemplate any adjudicatory exercise leading to fixation of liability, unless and until the same was accepted or agreed upon. W.P.(C) No. 5334/2011 - 3 - 6. Taking note of the specific contentions made as above, this Court finds that the petitioner is at liberty to pursue the matter in O.S No.630/2008 as referred to above, pending before the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam and the same shall be finalised by the Civil Court untrammelled by the contents of Ext.P10. The rights and liberties of the parties concerned and the contentions are left open. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE vdv