IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 13750 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- VASUDEVAN, S/O.SANKARAN, AGED 45 YEARS, VASUDEVAVILASOM, ENADIMANGALAM VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.B.BALRAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY FOR R2 SMT.N.SANTHA FOR R2 SRI.S.A.ANAND FOR R2 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.V.MANOJ KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.13750/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT NO.93/05-06/EE/LSGD DT 28.2.2006 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 27.1.2007 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ACCORDING SANCTION FOR ADDITIONAL WORK. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO.1/06-07 DT 29.3.2007 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.2210/DPI/2006/LSGD DT 24.2.2006 ISSUED BY THE STATE OF KERALA. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.3.2008 IN WPC NO.18881/07 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 13750 OF 2008 J ==================== Dated this the 12th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he had executed certain works under the SSGRY Scheme in terms of an agreement executed on 28/2/2006. According to him, as per the provisions of the scheme, towards a portion of the amount payable, food grains are to be supplied. Parties are unanimous in submitting that the monetary payment that is due has already been paid. However, the food grains were not supplied due to its non availability, despite the petitioner having completed the work. It is submitted that the District Collector has already intimated the 2nd respondent Panchayat about the non availability of food grains and according to the petitioner, in terms of Ext.P4, it is for the Panchayat to include the liability due to the petitioner under the plan fund and to make payment on that basis. 2. I heard the counsel for the 2nd respondent Panchayat also. 3. If as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the District Collector has already intimated the 2nd respondent about the non availability of food grains, necessarily, it is for the Panchayat to take WPC 13750/08 :2 : further action on that basis. This means that the Panchayat should include the liability of the petitioner in this year's plan fund and make payment on that basis. This the 2nd respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp