IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 959 of 2009 ---------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.2742/2009 Dated 26/03/2009 .................... APPELLANT/ADDITIONAL 3RD RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------------------------------- PADMANABHAN P., S/O.CHEKKAYI, RESIDING AT PALASSERY HOUSE, VATTAPPARA, NARUKARA P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.A.NIZAR, PALAYI ATHANIKKAL, KARUVAMBRAM WEST, MANJERI. 2. THE MANJERI MUNICIPALITY, MANJERI, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV.SRI.P.P.JACOB ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR FOR R2 R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2009 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 13061 OF 2009 & WPC NO. 2742 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.959 of 2009, W.P.(C) No.2742 of 2009 & W.P.(C) No.13061 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 7th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. The writ appeal is filed against an interim order dated 26.3.2009 in W.P.(C) No.2742 of 2009. The issue pertains to the construction of Oaranadathu Anganwadi Road. The learned Single Judge passed the interim order staying the operation of Ext.P5 marked therein whereby the construction of the road work was stopped. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the contractor points out that at the time of passing the interim order, two-third portion of the tendered work had already been completed and hence in that view of the matter only, Ext.P5 was stayed by the learned Single Judge. As per Ext.P5 the Secretary of the Municipality passed an order pending enquiry into the various W.A.No.959 of 2009, etc. - 2 - complaints with regard to the road work. 3. W.P.(C) No.13061 of 2009 was filed by the contractor challenging Ext.P14 order. As per Ext.P14, the Secretary of the Municipality passed another order referring to the interim order dated 24.4.2009 passed this Court in W.A.No.959 of 2009 to maintain status quo and thereby to stop the work. 4. W.P.(C) No.2742 of 2009 is filed by the contractor challenging Ext.P5 order passed by the Secretary of the Municipality, which is the Ext.P5 referred to hereinabove. 5. During the pendency of the writ appeal we called for the records. On going through the records, we find that there was absolutely no justification on the part of the Secretary of the Municipality in interfering with the work which had already been tendered and which had been in progress. Therefore, by order dated 2.6.2009, the interim order passed earlier was vacated and the work was directed to be completed in public interest. W.A.No.959 of 2009, etc. - 3 - 6. Since the full facts were not brought to the notice of this Court, the Secretary was issued with a notice as to why this Court was not apprised of the true facts and why appropriate action shall not be taken against him. Sri.Samji David, the Secretary of Manjeri Municipality has filed two affidavits, one dated 8.6.2009 and another dated 4.7.2009. On going through the affidavits, we are satisfied that there was no deliberate attempt on the part of Sri.Samji David either to mislead this Court or to interfere with the due course of justice. He has tendered unconditional apology for the inconvenience caused to this Court. In view of the remorseful conduct on the part of Sri.Samji David, further proceedings against him are dropped. 7. Learned counsel for the Municipality and the Secretary submit that the Municipality will see that the road work is completed as per the tender in compliance with the interim order passed by this Court referred to above. In that view of the matter, W.A.No.959 of 2009, etc. - 4 - no further orders are necessary in the writ appeal or the writ petitions. They are all disposed of recording the submission made by the counsel for the Municipality that the road work will be completed as per the tender expeditiously. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns