IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1876 of 2009(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.C.JOSEPH, GOVT. CONTRACTOR, VADAKKUMCHERIL HOUSE, MANJAPRA P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IDAMALAYAR IRRIGATION PROJECT NO.2, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No.1876 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner was awarded a tender for effecting improvements/maintenance/protection including CD works of the Right Bank of Idamalayar at Ch.22/400 to 22/600 at Chanthakkunnu. It is stated that, in satisfaction of the final bill that he submitted, he has been paid only 50% of the amount due. However, the balance has not been released for the reason that the Vigilance enquiry has been pending. 2. In several cases this court has ordered in similar circumstances that on furnishing bank guarantee, the respondents shall release the payment that is due and two of the judgments are produced as Exts.P2 and P3. It is on that basis that the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to release the amount due to him on his WP(c).No.1876/09 2 furnishing bank guarantee for the full amount. 3. However the Government Pleader on instruction points out that the Vigilance enquiry has since been completed and that the report with a recommendation to institute prosecution against among others, the petitioner also, is pending consideration of the Government. 4. As already noticed, several contractors, against whom also vigilance enquiry was pending. Payments have already been released following the judgments that were rendered by this Court. If that be so, the fact that the vigilance enquiry has been competed and the report is pending consideration of the Government need not stand in the way of the petitioner getting the amount released, subject to his furnishing bank guarantee. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that on the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee for the full amount that is due, the 2nd respondent shall take steps for releasing the amount due to the petitioner. It shall be the WP(c).No.1876/09 3 responsibility of the petitioner to furnish and keep the bank guarantee alive until the proceedings are finalized and that it will be the obligation of the 2nd respondent to ensure that the Bank guarantee is obtained from the petitioner and to invoke the same if the petitioner commits any default in keeping it alive at any stage. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/