IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2008 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 21776 of 2005(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SRI. SAFFARULLAKHAN, AZEENA MANZIL, KUNDAYAM, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, PUNALUR. BY ADV. SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PATTEZHI VADAKKEMURI, VILLAGE OFFICE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, PUNALUR. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, PATHANAPURAM, PUNALUR. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P. SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY R2 DT.23.5.05. P2: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE R1 BY THE PETITIONER DT.2.6.05. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.21776 of 2005 .................................................................... Dated this the 6th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT The W.P. was filed challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of loss suffered by the Government which is only Rs.33,099/-. According to Government Pleader, contract awarded was for construction of a reservoir and for execution of the contract, materials were supplied by the department. The petitioner neither executed the work nor returned the materials. Obviously department is entitled to recover cost of materials and other loss suffered by it. Even though W.P. was admitted in 2005, no stay was granted by this court and therefore, respondents were free to proceed with recovery. It is not known whether the amount is already paid or recovered. In any case I find no merit in entertaining the challenge against recovery proceedings. The W.P. is therefore devoid of any merit and is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms