IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35256 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.K.JOY,S/O.KURIAKOSE, AGED 53 YEARS, MATTATHIL HOUSE, NJAYAPILLY P.O.,KUTTAMPUZHA,KOTHAMANGALAM BY ADV. SRI.BASIL MATHEW SRI.K.B.SAJAN SRI.NOYAL J.HARI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.35256 OF 2010(F) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition has been filed for a direction requiring the 2nd respondent to pay an amount of Rs.1,24,500/- to the petitioner. 2. Petitioner claim that pursuant to the agreement No.1 of 2009-2010 dated 1.8.2009 entered into between him and the 2nd respondent he completed construction of the compound wall of the Forest Depot, at Kothamangalam. It is stated that for the execution of the said work, balance amount of Rs.1,24,500/- is due and that despite various demands the amount has not been paid for the reason that the Municipal authorities had demolished the said compound wall. It is in these circumstances, he has approached this court by filing this writ petition. 3. Government Pleader has obtained instructions in the matter. According to the Government Pleader, it is true that the petitioner was the successful contractor for the construction of the compound wall on the southern side of the Forest Depot in Kothamanagalam. It is stated that the petitioner had completed WPC.No. 35256/2010 :2 : the work and that out of the tender amount Rs.1,36,858/- has been paid to him. Learned Government Pleader also accepts that balance amount of Rs.18,750/- is due. According to him, however soon after the compound wall was constructed, on 4.12.2009 the Municipal authorities demolished the compound wall and as a result of which, the measurements taken could not be cross checked. It is stated that it was therefore that the balance amount of Rs.18,750/- could not be paid to the petitioner. 4. The admitted position is that the petitioner has completed the construction of Southern side of the compound wall and even according to the Government Pleader an amount of Rs.18,750/- remains unpaid. The cross checking of the measurement was not possible on account of the fact that the compound wall was demolished by the Municipal authorities. It was for that reason that the Auditor also raised objection. In my view, since the petitioner cannot be attributed responsibility for the aforesaid act of the Municipal authorities, the inability of the forest authorities to cross check the measurements cannot result in a situation that the petitioner is prejudiced. WPC.No. 35256/2010 :3 : 5. Therefore the petitioner is entitled to be paid the admitted amount of Rs.18,750/-, which the 2nd respondent should pay at any rate within 6 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. 6. Although, it is the case of the petitioner that Rs.1,24,500 is due, in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this court can only direct the authorities to discharge the admitted liability and cannot resolve disputed questions of fact or adjudicate the exact amount due. Therefore, while I direct the 2nd respondent to pay the admitted amount due to the petitioner, I also leave it open to the petitioner to pursue any further claim that he may have against the respondents for the work he has executed. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 35256/2010 :4 :