IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4193 of 2011(Y) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- G.SIVANKUTTY NAIR, PWD CONTRACTOR, MADATHIL KULANGARA VEEDU, POTHENCODE.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 584. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, BUILDINGS AND LOCAL WORKS, P W D PUBLIC OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SPECIAL BUILDINGS DIVISION, P W D, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. 4. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 5. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLGE.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 011. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, SEWERAGE DIVISION, PATTOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 024. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH, R6 BY ADV. SMT.AMBIKA DEVI, SC, KWA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 4193 of 2011 Y ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner, a PWD Contractor, submits that he undertook the work of laying sewage Main Line reconstruction in the premises of SAT Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram for the fourth respondent. He submits that the work was executed in 2009 and that the bill amount comes to `17,99,000/-. It is stated that despite having executed the work to the satisfaction of the respondents, payment has not been disbursed. According to the petitioner, even Ext.P5 representation made to the fifth respondent did not evoke any response. It is in these circumstances the writ petition has been filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, the work has been executed, prima facie, there is no reason for non payment. Be that as it may, taking note of his case that Ext.P5 submitted to the fifth respondent is pending, I dispose of this W.P.(C) No.4193/2011 : 2 : writ petition, directing the fifth respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within four weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge