IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 27404 of 2010(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.K. SULPHIKER, S/O.MUHAMMED HAJI, AGED 50 YEARS, KOLATHIKKAL HOUSE, KEEZHUPARAMBA, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTIRCT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT SECRETRIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, PARK VIEW, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,PWD ROADS AND BRIDGES, NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS DIVISION, KASARAGOD. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.DILEEP MOHAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 27404/2010-A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 15/04/2009 AS NO.DC6-985/2006. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE COMPLETION CERTIFICATE, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED, 16/09/2009 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 07/07/2010 ALONG WITH THE HAND RECEIPT REGARDING THE PURCHASE OF BITUMEN, COUNTERSIGNED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, P.W.D. ROADS SECTION, KANJANGAD. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY SAJEESH, TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 09/07/2010. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ROADS), KASARAGODE DATED 16/07/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 27404 OF 2010 (A) ===================== Dated this the 11th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Based on an agreement executed between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, petitioner has completed the work of Bekal-Panayal Road. In this writ petition, petitioner submits that towards the cost of bitumen purchased by him for completion of the work, an amount of Rs.39,92,302/- is remaining unpaid. It is seeking orders for the payment of the said amount, the writ petition is filed. 2. In para 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 3 and 4, it is admitted that, an amount of Rs.39,92,302/- is remaining unpaid to the petitioner. The only justification offered by the learned Government Pleader is that the work was executed for an on behalf of the Tourism Department and that the 3rd respondent is awaiting disbursement of funds by the 2nd respondent, for payment to petitioner. 3. Admittedly, the contract was executed between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, and even according to the respondents, there is no provision in the agreement enabling the WPC No. 27404/10 :2 : 3rd respondent to make payment when funds are made available by the 2nd respondent. If that be so, the primary liability to settle the contract claim is that of the 3rd respondent. 4. In that view of the matter and as the liability and its quantum are admitted, the 3rd respondent is directed to ensure that the amount due to the petitioner is paid at any rate within 2 months of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp