IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29534 of 2011(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ROY MATHEW, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, PAMPLANIYIL HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM P.O., PALA - VIA., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 578. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, BUILDINGS & LOCAL WORKS, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR - 680 001. 2. KERALA KALAMANDALAM, CHERUTHURUTHY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHERUTHURUTHY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 016. R1 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.29534/2011-N: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE BEARING NO.D2-1192/10 DATED 22.12.2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT NO.76/2010-11/SE, B & LW CC, TSR DATED 13.1.2011 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.1.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P-4 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, UPON SERVING THE SAID REPRESENTATION DATED 29.7.2011 ON THE 1ST RESPONDENT, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BUILDING DIVISION, S T NAGAR, THRISSUR AND THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, BUILDING SECTION, WADAKKANCHERRY. EXT.P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 29534 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner says that he was awarded the work of construction of Boys Hostel for Kerala Kalamandalam, Cheruthuruthy. It is his case that due to the delay on the part of the respondent the work could not be commenced. Therefore he made Ext.P5 representation before the 1st respondent. 2. In this writ petition what is sought for is a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P5. Though the rights of the petitioner are regulated by terms of contract, once representation as above has been made it is for the first respondent to consider the same in accordance with the tender conditions. 3. Therefore I dispose of the writ petition directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P5 and pass orders W.P.(C) No. 29534 OF 2011 :2 : thereon as expeditiously as possible at any rate within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-