IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 8457 of 2011(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER ----------------- T.A.MOOSA, AGED 44 YEARS, SON OF LATE M.ABDUL KHADIR, THALAKKATTU HOUSE, 13/52B, ST.JOSEPH CHRCH ROAD, NORTH CHALAKUDY-680307. BY ADVS. SRI.H.B.SHENOY SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY SRI.ABU MATHEW SRI.SOBHAN GEORGE SRI.V.SHYAM SRI.K.V.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ADDITIONAL IRRIGATION DIVISION, CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR-680020. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ADDITIONAL IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION, CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR-680020. 5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, IRRIGATION SECTION, OLLUKARA, CHEMBUKAVU THRISSUR-680020. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8457 of 2011(F) ---------------------------------- APPENDIX ---------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF LETTER NO.OL/1-05 DATED 11.8.2006 SENT BY 5TH RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONENT WITH REVISED ESTIMATE REPORT ATTACHED THERET. EXT.P2. COPY OF REPRESENTATIN DATED 16.9.2010 SENT BY PETITINER TO 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPNDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------------------- / TRUE CPY / P.A.T O JUDGE VK ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.8457 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be a registered Government Contractor. According to the petitioner he was awarded the work of 'Protecting the right Bank of Karuvannur River at Ettumuna near Herbert Canal'. About 90% of the work was completed by him in May 2006, when the petitioner had to stop the work at the request of respondents themselves. According to him, he has not been paid his full dues for the the works executed. Representations made by him were also not replied. It is in these circumstances the writ petition has been filed. 2. When the matter was taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction to the 3rd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P2 representation. 3. I heard the learned Government Pleader also in this matter. Now that Ext.P2 application made by the petitioner for payment of his dues, is still pending W.P(C) No.8457 of 2011 2 consideration of the 3rd respondent, without expressing anything on merits of the contentions raised, I direct the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P2 and pass orders thereon. 4. This the 3rd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. The Writ Petition is disposed of ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE