IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4850 of 2010() ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.JOHN, PROPRIETOR, ANSONS GROUP ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS, UNION AUTO BUILDING MUNICIPAL JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ALUVA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE SECRETARY ,ALUVA MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPAL OFFICE ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ALUVA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.4850 OF 2010 (E) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that being an Architect, he submitted necessary plan and other details for the construction of a shopping complex for the first respondent Municipality. According to the petitioner in terms of the agreement between the parties he is entitled to Rs.7,96,350/- as his fees. He made a claim but however he was informed that he can be paid only Rs.60,000/-. Petitioner thereupon made Exts.P9 and P10 complains to the Chair Person of the Municipality and no decision has been taken on these representations. According to the petitioner he is entitled to be paid at the rates as permissible under Ext.P5 and if so, he should be paid the fee claimed by him. Now that the claim of the petitioner has not been decided so far and as Exts.P9 and P10 are pending before the Chair Person of the Municipality, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to decide on Exts.P9 and P10, in the light of the contentions raised by the petitioner. This the 3rd respondent shall do with notice to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and WPC.No. 4850/2010 :2 : at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of production of a coy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/