IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 19721 of 2010(M) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- T.K.VARGHESE, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, THOTTIKATTIL HOUSE, MEKKADAMBU PO, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.BABU THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. MUVATTUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY , REP.BY ITS SECRETARY,MUVATTUPUZHA PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, MUVATTUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY , MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, SECRETRIAT, TRIVANDRUM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN, SC, MUVATTUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.RAMESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.19721/2010 M APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF AGREEMENT NO.112/2004-2005 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR CARRYING OUT THE WORK DTD. 18/02/2005. P2: COPY OF BILL PASSED FOR PAYMENT RS.52,084/- DTD. 30/05/2005. P2(A): COPY OF THE BILL FOR PAYMENT OF RS.71,182/- DTD. 28/02/2006. P2(B): COPY OF THE BILL FOR PAYMENT OF RS.80,912/- DTD. 23/05/2006. P2(C): COPY OF THE BILL FOR PAYMENT OF RS.1,56,787/- DTD. 6/06/2008. P2(D): COPY OF THE WORK ORDER AND COMPLETION CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT OF RS.34,500/- DTD. 4/08/2006. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. NON - PAYENT OF RS.2,63,695/- DTD. 25/06/2007. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER OF SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., MUVATTUPUZHA WITH OUTSTANDING AMOUNT OF RS.2,37,575/- DTD. 7/12/2009. P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING PAYMENT OF RS.3,94,678/- AND TO RELEASE SECURITY DEPOSITS OF RS.15,300/- DTD. 18/12/2009. P6: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE INFORMATION OFFICER, THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE BILLS PASSED FOR PAYMENT DUE TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 11/02/2010. P7: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATES OF PAYMENT OF LATER BILLS DTD.23/3/2010. P8: COPY OF THE PERMANENT DISABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DUE TO AMPUTATION OF HIS RIGHT LEG. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 19721 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a contractor who had executed certain works awarded to him by the Muvattupuzha Municipality. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to forthwith effect payment of the sum of Rs.3,94,678/- for the work done by him besides the sum of Rs.15,300/-, which represents the security deposit made by him, along with interest at lending rates. 2. The Secretary of Muvattupuzha Municipality has filed a statement dated 8.11.2010. The main contention raised by him is that in view of the paucity of funds, the Municipality is not in a position to make a lump sum payment to the petitioner. It is stated that the payment will be made during the current financial year depending upon the financial position of the Municipality. 3. I heard Smt. Markutty Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Ashish K., learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. K.Ramesh, learned Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent. I have also gone through the pleadings and the materials on record. Respondents 1 WPC No.19721/2010 2 and 2 do not dispute the fact that the petitioner has executed the work awarded by them. They have no dispute with regard to the quality of the work done by the petitioner. The amount payable to the petitioner is also not in dispute. The only ground raised by the first respondent in his statement is that the Municipality has no funds to pay the amount to the petitioner in lump. I am of the opinion that it is a poor defence which the respondents have put forward. After having extracted the work from the petitioner who as claimed by him has borrowed funds from banks and other financial institutions, respondents 1 and 2 cannot be heard to contend that the petitioner should wait till their finance position improves to make payment for the work done by him. It is the duty of the Municipality to pay the petitioner. If the Municipality did not have funds, they should not have ventured to undertake the works. As regards the sum of Rs.15,300/-, it is stated that the said sum has already been disbursed. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to pay over to the petitioner the sum of Rs.3,94,678/- referred to in Ext.P2 series of bills expeditiously and in any event , within two months from the date on which the petitioner WPC No.19721/2010 3 produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary of Muvattupuzha Municipality. It is clarified that if payment is not made within the time limit stipulated above, the petitioner will be entitled to simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the said sum of Rs.3,94,678/- with effect from this day onwards. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.19721/2010 4 WPC No.19721/2010 5