IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28640 of 2011(D) ----------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- S.BALAKRISHNAN NADAR, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O.C.SHANKARAN NADAR, 'SUDHEER BHAVAN', PERUKAVU PO, TRIVANDRUM 695 573. BY ADVS. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA SRI.T.K.SANDEEP SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR SRI.ANEISH RAVINDRA SRI.ARUN KRISHNADHAN SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE (MULLAKKARIYIL) SRI.K.RATHISH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KEARLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695 001. 2. VILAPPIL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695 573. 3. ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, STATE CELL, MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME, RURAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONERATE, LMS COMPOUND, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695 001.. 4. DIRECTOR, STATE SOCIAL AUDIT CELL, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695 001. R1, R3 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. E.M. ABDUL KADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 28640 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29/9/2011 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON NIL EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24/10/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENTS RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................. W.P.(C).NO.28640 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is a septuagenarian aged 73 years and engaged by the respondent Panchayat for implementation of some Scheme as Accredited Engineer on a contract basis, was served with Ext.P3 notice dated 24.10.2011 stating that, in view of the serious allegations and the report submitted by the authorities concerned as to the involvement of the petitioner in various malpractices, the contract arrangement was put an end to requiring him to return all the files, documents and materials on or before 7.11.2011. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The case of the petitioner is that no opportunity of hearing was given to him. After going through the materials on record, it is seen that there is no employer- employee relationship between the petitioner and the Panchayat. The engagement was admittedly on the basis of contract, the terms of which are not produced before this Court. If the petitioner has got a case that the terms of W.P.(C).NO.28640 OF 2011 : 2 : the contract have not been honoured by the Panchayat and any damage has been caused to the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to have it pursued before the appropriate forums which has to be considered and adjudicated on the basis of the specific pleadings and evidence to be let in. It does not come within the purview of this Court, in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No interference is possible. The writ petition fails and it is dismissed accordingly. Sd/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. cl