IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 32757 of 2008(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- P.C.RAJU, S/O.CHACKOCHAN, CHEMPAKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARIKODE P.O. PERUVA VIA. KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KADUTHURUTHY BLOCK, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KADUTHURUTHY BLOCK KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DRDA, KOTTAYAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.32757/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT NO.105/05-06 DT 23.2.206. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF RUNNING ACCOUNT BILL. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF FINAL BILL PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF LAWYERS NOTICE DT 18.6.2008. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 32757 OF 2008 (Y) ==================== Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner states that being a contractor, in pursuance to Ext.P1 agreement, he has executed the work of maintenance of Peruva- Chettikadu-Kanjiramattom Road in Mulamkulam Panchayat under the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner, he completed the work and submitted Ext.P2 final bill before the 3rd respondent. It is stated that though the bill was submitted soon after the work was completed on 31/3/2007, the 3rd respondent has not processed the same and forwarded to the 4th respondent, who in turn, is to make it over to the 2nd respondent for payment. It is complaining of delay on the part of the 3rd respondent in processing the bill, the writ petition is filed. 2. As noticed, the case of the petitioner is that he has satisfactorily completed the work entrusted to him under Ext.P1. According to him, the work was completed on 31/3/2007 and immediately thereafter the final bill was submitted. It is also stated that the measurements have been taken and in terms of which, he is entitled to be paid Rs.4,99,949.77/-. 3. If as stated by the petitioner, this final bill has been received, WPC 32757/08 :2 : there is no reason why the 3rd respondent should delay processing the same. 4. Taking into account the complaint of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent has not processed the bill, it is directed that the 3rd respondent shall process Ext.P2 bill in the light of Ext.P3 final measurement and forward his report to the 4th respondent. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On its receipt, the 4th respondent shall finalise and sent it on to the 2nd respondent for necessary action within 4 weeks. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp