IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8623 of 2008(B) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- O.M.POULOSE, GOVT. CONTRACTOR, OOTTAMCHERRY HOUSE, SOUTH VAZHAKULAM P.O., ALUVA-VIA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI. K.I. SAGEER IBRAHIM RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (NATIONAL HIGHWAYS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY (CENTRAL CIRCLE), KOCHI, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY [B] DIVISION, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR (TECH) NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS, VYTTILA, COCHIN-19. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI. ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8623 of 2008(B) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO. NHAI/TECH/10010/01/2001/1036 DATED 27.4.2006 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO. 1892/2008/FIN. DATED 1.3.2008 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE NECESSARY LETTER OF CREDIT SANCTIONED ALONG WITH EXT.P2 BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO. A2.337/08 DATED 11.3.2008 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4[a] - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 4.12.2007 IN W.P.(C) NO. 21129/2007. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.3.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.8623 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 26th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a contractor who has executed certain work awarded by the respondents. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that although the work was a deposit work and the petitioner has already been given a letter of credit, the amounts due to him for the execution of the work has not been paid. The learned Government Pleader submits that the amounts could not be paid only because in Ext.P4A judgment, which was also in respect of a similar contract, this court has directed payment in the order of seniority. I do not think that simply because in one judgment there was such a direction, the petitioner can be deprived of the amount for his work when he has already been given a letter of credit and the amount payable for the work is already in deposit. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent to see that the amounts due to the petitioner are paid, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs