IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29913 of 2011(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER : - ---------------------- N.J. JOHNSON, AGED 47, S/O. JOSEPH, NADAKKALAN HOUSE, THALORE P.O, ADATT, THRISSUR 680 306. BY ADV. SRI. BABU PAUL RESPONDENT : - --------------- -------- COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR - 680 301. BY ADV. SRI. N. RAGHURAJ, S.C FOR COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29913 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2009 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT P2 : PHOTOGRAPHS EVIDENCING THE UNAUTHORIZED ADVERTISEMENTS. EXT P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.10.2010. EXT P4 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.11.2010. EXT P5 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.11.2010. EXT P6 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.12.2010. EXT P7 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.02.2011. EXT P8 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.10.2011. EXT P9 : COPY OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE IN THE MATHRUBOOMY DAILY DATED 01.11.2011. EXT P10 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29.10.2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/- ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 29913 of 2011 L ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ext.P1 is the agreement between the petitioner and the respondent whereby contract for exhibiting sign boards on the iron grills erected on the Thekkinkadu Maidan of the respondent was awarded to the petitioner. The period of the contract was for two years and it is expiring on 30.11.2011. According to the petitioner, despite request made to the respondent and also to the authorities, unauthorised advertisement boards and banners put up by various authorities such as political parties and social and cultural organisations could not be removed and that as a result, his business prospectus were affected causing loss to him and, therefore, petitioner made representation to the respondent, seeking renewal of contract for a further period of two years at an enhanced rate. This representation is pending. Meanwhile, Ext.P9 tender notice for the W.P.(C) No.29913/2011 : 2 : subsequent period has been published and by Ext.P10 his representation also was rejected. It is in these circumstances the writ petition has been filed, seeking to quash Exts.P9 and P10 and also to direct the respondent not to proceed with the tender formalities. 2. While the petitioner contends that due to the indifference of the respondent and the authorities, the unauthorised boards could not be removed affecting his business prospects, stand taken by the respondent is that under the agreement conditions, it was the responsibility of the petitioner himself to remove such boards and that non removal of the boards cannot be a reason to claim any relief from the respondent. 3. First of all, the relationship between the parties is purely contractual and if according to the petitioner, the respondent has broken the conditions of the agreement, his remedy lies in damages. As far as the agreement between the parties is concerned, the period thereof expires on W.P.(C) No.29913/2011 : 3 : 30.11.2011 and on such expiry, it is always open to the respondent to proceed for award of contract for the future period. Therefore, petitioner cannot seek any direction from this Court to quash Exts.P9 and P10 or seek any extension of the contract period. Writ petition fails and accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/10/11 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge