IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2009 / 9TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 26122 of 2007(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ K.R. ABDURAHIMAN, S/O. MOIDEENKUTTY, CONVENOR, MUNDAKKAL - MECHERI ROAD, CHEEKODE. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE(DISASTER MANAGEMENT) SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, POVERTY ALLEVIATION UNIT, DISTRICT PANCHAYAT, MALAPPURAM. 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, AREACODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kkms/ S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 26122 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 30th June, 2009. J U D G M E N T As the convenor of repair and restoration work of Mundakkal – Mecheri road, the petitioner completed the work entrusted to him and submitted a bill for an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs. According to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent scrutinized the bill and approved the same, forwarding the same to the 4th respondent for necessary action, under cover of Ext. P1 letter. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that although Ext. P1 was issued on 24-7-2007, the petitioner has not yet received the amounts due. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to settle the bill of the petitioner evidenced by Ext. P1. (b) Declare that the respondents cannot invite new tenders without settling the pending bills in respect of work done under disaster management.” 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, in which the liability to pay has been admitted. The only ground stated for non-payment is that the Government has not made available sufficient funds. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. It is interesting to note that in the counter affidavit it is specifically stated that the Executive Engineer, PWD (Roads Division), Manjeri was directed to execute the work on a war footing. If the Government wanted the work done on a war footing, I am at a total loss to understand how on completing the work on a war footing, they can in the same breath say that they cannot settle the bill for want of funds sanctioned by the Government. After having got W.P.C. No. 26122/2007. -: 2 :- the petitioner to do the work on a war footing, such urgency should be shown in the matter of payment of the bill as well. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to see that the bill amount due to the petitioner is paid within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/