IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 21ST MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4319 of 2010(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.P.K.RAMACHANDRAN A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P.K.RAMACHANDRAN S/O.KUNJU PANICKER, AGED 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT DEEPA MANDIR KARUVELIPPADY, KOCHI-5. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP SMT.K.DEEPA (PAYYANUR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN REP BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR R1 & R2 MS.K.R.DEEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.4319 of 2010 (L) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a contractor. His grievance is against Resolution No.14 dated 24/4/2009 passed by the 1st respondent resolving to retender the work at the risk and cost of the petitioner. This resolution of the Corporation was communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P4. On its receipt the petitioner moved the Government seeking to get the resolution rescinded by invoking Section 57 of the Municipality Act. Ext.P5 is the petition thus filed by the petitioner. This petition is pending. In this writ petition he seeks expeditious disposal of Ext.P5 and also seeks a direction to the Corporation to issue a copy of the resolution, against which Ext.P5 has been filed. 2. I heard the learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 & 2 and the learned Government Pleader, who appeared on behalf of the 3rd respondent. 3. If as a matter of fact, a copy of the resolution dated WP(C) No.4319/2010 -2- 24/4/2009 against which Ext.P5 has been filed, has not been served on the petitioner, he is justified in his prayer for getting a copy thereof. Therefore, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to issue a copy of resolution No.14 dated 24/04/2009 mentioned in Ext.P4 on the production of a copy of this judgment. The 3rd respondent, before whom Ext.P5 petition has been filed under Section 57 of the Municipality Act, has to expedite disposal of Ext.P5. Therefore, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P5 petition with notice to the petitioner and respondents 1 & 2. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg