IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2008 / 30TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 15003 of 2008(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- K.ANANDAN, S/O.K.P.KITTA, PEECHIYODE VEEDU, KODUVAYUR, PALAKKAD- 678501. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (POLITICAL) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 3. CHIEF ENGINEER, P.W.D.(BUILDINGS & LOCAL WORKS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.W.D.(BUILDINGS & LOCAL WORKS), N.CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE- 673 001. 5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.W.D.(BUILDINGS), PALAKKAD. 6. V.S.VIJAYA RAGHAVAN, PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONGRESS COMMITTEE(I), JAWAHAR BHAVAN, TAILOR STREET, PALAKKAD-678001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADERSRI. M.R. SABU FOR R1 TO 4 SRI.K.HARILAL FOR R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15003 of 2008(J) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO. REF A2/16402/2006 DATED 18.4.2006 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 12.9.2007 BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT SUBMITTED BYTHE PETITIONER. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. P.B./D-3 1188/06 DATED 25.2.2008 ISSUED BY 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PB/D3-1188/06 DATED 17.3.2008 ISSUED BY 5TH RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.15003 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 21st day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner took on contract the works of construction of stage, barricades and providing lighting and sound for the meeting in connection with the visit of the Prime Minister of India and the President of the All India Congress Committee at Victoria College, Palakkad. The work was of an emergent nature. The petitioner is stated to have completed the same. The petitioner complains that the amounts due to the extent of Rs.9,34,554/- have not been paid to the petitioner yet, although the work was completed in 2006. The petitioner therefore seeks a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to disburse the said amount to the petitioner. The contention of the Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents 1 to 5 is that the work was undertaken on behalf of the 6th respondent and therefore the 6th respondent to pay the amount. But admittedly, the contract is between the petitioner and the respondents 1 to 5. That being so, the petitioner cannot be directed to go after 6th respondent with whom the petitioner has no privity of contract, for the amount. If the respondents 1 to 5 has a case that the W.P(C)No.15003 of 2008 - 2 - 6th respondent is to pay the same, it is for the respondents 1 to 5 to realise it from the 6th respondent, for which the petitioner cannot be asked to wait. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 see that the amounts due to the petitioner for the above said work is paid within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs