IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 29154 of 2011(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- G.KUTTAPPAN, S/O.GOVINDAN, NALANDA HOUSE NALANDA HOUSE NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SMT.S.MUMTAZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, ROADS & BRIDGES, PWD,PUBLIC OFFICE, MUSEUM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS DIVISON, PWD,PUBLIC OFFICE, MUSEUM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS DIVISION, PWD,PUBLIC OFFICE, MUSEUM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PWD ROADS & BRIDGES, SOTUH CIRCLE, NANTHAVANAM, MUSEUM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.29154/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 29/3/2011 EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLIMENTAL AGREEMENT WAS ENTERED BY THE PETITIONER ON 30/3/2011 EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DTD 16/7/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IST RESPONDENT EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED ON THE IST RESPONDENT THROUGH THE LAWYER DTD 16/8/2011 EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD 21/10/2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF REPLY GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH THE LAWYER DTD.29/10/2011 EXT.P7:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD 24/10/2011 RECEIVED ON 29/10/2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 29154 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 6th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was awarded the work of improvement of Kollamkonam - Puliyarakonam road. According to the petitioner, he has now been issued Ext.P7, a notice asking him to commence the work. The complaint in the writ petition is that due to non execution of supplementary agreement, the petitioner is not in a position to commence the work. 2. However, learned Government Pleader submitted that department was always willing to execute such an agreement and that in fact the petitioner was also given notice to appear before the 4th respondent on 29/8/11 for execution of the supplementary agreement. It is stated that despite the notices, the petitioner did not appear as directed and it was therefore that the agreement could not be executed. On further instructions, it is also now submitted that despite all the failures on the part of the petitioner, if the petitioner is willing to execute the agreement, department is still willing to enter into the agreement. 3. As already seen, the grievance of the petitioner is that WPC No.29154/11 :2 : on account of the non execution of the supplementary agreement, he is unable to commence the work in question, instructions of the learned Government Pleader shows that even at this distance of time, petitioner is free to appear before the 4th respondent and execute the agreement. In that view of the matter. I dispose of this writ petition directing that, if the petitioner appears before the 4th respondent within two weeks from today, he will be permitted to enter into a supplementary agreement, for commencing the work in question. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp