IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2010 / 14TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29303 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MANJU.M.ISMAIL, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.P.P.M.ISMAIL, POWATH HOUSE, MANDIRAM P.O., RANNI. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF SRI.G.JAYAKUMAR (MYNAGAPPALLY) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, RPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 2. RANNI BLOCK PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, RANNI- 689 672. 3. SECRETARY, RANNI BLOCK PANCHAYAT, RANNI- 689 672. 4. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, RANNI-689 672. 5. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, L.S.G.D. SUB DIVISION, RANNI BLOCK PANCHAYAT, RANNI 689 672. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.29303 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T The work of improvements to Kompanoli-Kurishu Junction Thekkumala Road in Ranni Block Panchayat was awarded to the petitioner way back in the year 2005. The work has not so far been completed. It appears that the petitioner has executed some works and has also raised part bills. When the part bills were not paid, he moved a representation before the Secretary of the Panchayat and thereafter filed W.P.(C) No.4779 of 2010 in this Court. By Ext.P11 judgment delievered on 17.2.2010, a learned single Judge of this Court directed the Block Development Officer, Ranni, to consider the petitioner's representation and take an appropriate decision thereon. Pursuant thereto, the Block Development Officer, Ranni, who is also the Secretary of Ranni Block Panchayat considered the petitioner's claim and contentions and sent Ext.P12 letter dated 22.3.2010 informing him that as the work will have to be re-tendered at his risk and cost, the committee of the Block Panchayat has decided not to honour his part bills. Ext.P12 is under challenge in this writ petition. W.P.(C) No.29303/2010 2 2. A reading of Ext.P12 discloses that though the work was awarded in the year 2005 and had to be completed within one year, even after the expiry of 5 years, the petitioner has not been able to complete the work. Ext.P12 also discloses that the Committee of Ranni Block Panchayat has taken a decision to re-tender the work at the petitioner's risk and cost. The petitioner cannot, in my opinion, invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the purpose of check measuring the work already executed by him and challenging the decision taken by the Block Panchayat to re-tender the work at his risk and cost. The contract referred to in Ext.P12 is not a statutory contract. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the remedy of the petitioner, if he is aggrieved by Ext.P12, is to move the competent civil court. The writ petition fails and is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the competent civil court seeking appropriate reliefs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. nj.