IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2008 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15761 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ B.BALACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN NAIR, 'PUTHIYAVEETTIL', ELAPPUPARA PO, V.KOTTAYAM,. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ALAPPUZHA DIST.PANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, ALAPPUZHA,. 2. JILLA MANNU SAMRAKSHANA OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C) No. 15761 of 2008-B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 28th day of May, 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P2 and P5. It is stated that the petitioner had undertaken certain works and on the allegation that he had committed default, according to him, without issuing any notice or hearing, the work was terminated. Thereafter now the petitioner has been called up by Ext.P5 to appear before the second respondent, who is stated to have been the implementing authority on behalf of the first respondent. The purpose of Ext.P5 is that the petitioner should appear before the said respondent for quantifying the liability that the petitioner has incurred on account of the alleged default that the petitioner had committed. 2. In my view, the basic issue that is to be resolved is the validity of the termination of the contract and against that it is for the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedies that are provided under Section 276(5) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. In order to enable the petitioner to pursue that remedy, I direct that further W.P.(C).No.15761/2008-B -: 2 :- proceedings pursuant to Exts.P2 and P5 shall be kept in abeyance for one month from today. 3. In the meanwhile, it will be for the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedies and seek appropriate reliefs. 4. Yet another grievance raised by the petitioner is that he has not been given copy of the proceedings terminating the contract. It is directed that if the petitioner produces a copy of this judgment before the first respondent, the petitioner will be served with a copy of the proceedings without delay. 5. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge ms