IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 29TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22868 of 2011(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K. GOPALAN, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 70 YEARS, PWD CONTRACTOR, KOMATH HOUSE, P.O. KAYANNA BAZAR, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 525. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN, SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, KANNUR-670 001. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER SUPPLY DIVISION, KANNUR-670 001. 3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KWA, PH CIRCLE, KANNUR-670 001. 4. KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED, IIIRD FLOOR, CARMEL CENTRE, BANERJI ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. R2 & R3 BY ADV. SMT.AMBIKA DEVI, SC, KWA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/09/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 22868 of 2011(G) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PIECE WORK AGREEMENT EXECUTED WITH 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF WORK EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AS MEASURED AND RECORDED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MADE TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR WORKS. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P. NO. 28639 OF 2001. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.9.2008 OF 4TH RESPONDENT TO 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 5.10.2010 FURNISHED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE DATED 11.12.2009 ADDRESSED TO 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 22868 of 2011 G ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 20th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ It appears that respondents 1 to 3 had awarded the fourth respondent the work of construction of OH water tank at Payyannur in Kannur district. The fourth respondent, in turn, engaged the petitioner for executing the work. According to the petitioner, he executed the work in part and in the meanwhile, respondents 1 to 3 terminated the work and the petitioner's work was also terminated. Case of the petitioner is that, for the works executed by him, he has not been paid and it is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed. 2. Obviously therefore, as far as the petitioner is concerned, the contractual relationship is between himself and the fourth respondent and respondents 1 to 3 are strangers to that transaction. Therefore, if the petitioner has W.P.(C) No.22868/2011 : 2 : any monetary claim, necessarily, that will have to be taken up with the fourth respondent and not with anybody else. 3. In that view, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to make appropriate claim before the fourth respondent, in which event, the fourth respondent will decide on the claim within six weeks on receipt of the claim. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/20/09 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge