IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7640 of 2011(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ K.ABDULLA, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.AAMU, KUNIYA HOUSE, PERIYA POST, PALLIKKARA VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOTTAYAM-686003. 2. THE MANAGER, PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD., KASARAGOD ESTATE, PERIYA DIVISION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN 680610. R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOY JOSEPH(KOTTAYAM) ADV.SRI. MATHEWS K. UTHAPPACHAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.7640 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 21st March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: "i. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondents to settle petitioner's claim pursuant to Ext.P3 before taking any action pursuant to Ext.P4; ii. an order of stay of all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4, pending disposal of the writ petition; iii. a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, or order quashing Ext.P4; iv. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order direction directing the respondents to award the contract as per Ext.P4 to the petitioner on the very same conditions in Ext.P1. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the plight of the petitioner is very pathetic; that the petitioner executed the work to the satisfaction of the concerned respondents that the amounts due to the petitioner in respect of the works completed are still to be paid and further that the respondents still have decided W.P (C) No. 7640 of 2011 2 to issue a 'fresh tender' in respect of further excavation of the 'rain harvest tank' at the very same spot without assigning the same to the petitioner, which hence sought to be challenged in this writ petition. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that Ext.P3 preferred by the petitioner is pending before the 2nd respondent and that the same will be caused to be considered by the 1st respondent and appropriate orders will be passed, extending the relief to the possible extent. 4. In the above circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to have Ext.P3 considered and final order shall be passed thereon also disbursing the amount, if at all found due to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'one month' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge