IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37562 of 2009(M) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- P.ABDUL RAZAK, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.P.M.MOIDEEN HAJI, PULLIYIL MADASSERI HOUSE, P.O.MELMURI, (P.W.D.CONTRACTOR). BY MR.ESM.KABEER, ADVOCATE. MR.ABDUL MAJEED.N, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION SECTION, THIRURANGADI. BY MR.P. NARAYANAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.37562 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner had executed an agreement with the 3rd respondent for the work by name “Improvements to drainage system in Moraya Kappu in Nannambara Grama Panchayath” as per agreement No.SE (MI) 22/06 dated 22.07.2007. The petitioner executed the work during February 2007 till May and completed about 20% of the work. 2. The petitioner had approached this Court earlier in W.P.(C) No.9071/2009 and finally in Writ Appeal No.1162/2009 this Court directed the petitioner to approach the Government with regard to the subsisting claims of the petitioner and accordingly, the petitioner approached the Government by filing Exhibit P7 representation. 3. The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P7 prior to the finalisation of tenders in Exhibit P8 especially item No.6 relating to the same work. W.P.(C) No.37562/2009 2 4. Learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that earlier at the time of performance of the work, measurements were taken and now a final measurement can be taken in the presence of the petitioner and therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner that the execution of work pursuant to Exhibit P8 will affect his rights can be redressed if the 3rd respondent is allowed to complete the measurement in that manner. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P7, after hearing the petitioner, in the light of the directions issued in Exhibit P6 judgment, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, the 3rd respondent will complete the final measurement with notice to the petitioner and the same will be recorded duly for enabling the petitioner to sustain his claim before the Government. The petitioner will co-operate with the same. No costs. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp