Faiz M.D vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 11117 Ker

W.P(c).No.8699/2021-J              1

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

   WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                        WP(C).No.8699 OF 2021(J)


PETITIONER:

               FAIZ M.D
               AGED 38 YEARS
               S/O M.D ABDULLA, PWD CONTRACTOR, BERKA HOUSE,
               CHENGALA P.O.KASARAGOD-671 541.

               BY ADV. SHRI.TOM K.THOMAS

RESPONDENTS:

       1       THE STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC
               WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

       2       THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
               PWD ROADS, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALUVA-683 101.

       3       THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,
               PWD DIVISION, IDUKKI, PIN-685 602.

       4       THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
               PWD DIVISION, IDUKKI, PIN-685 602.


               SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P(c).No.8699/2021-J                        2




                              W.P(c) No.8699 of 2021-J
                    ----------------------------------------------------
                        Dated this the 7th day of April, 2021

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order of termination. According to

him, the order of termination was passed without considering the representation

submitted by him as per Ext.P2, which was followed by Exts.P3 and P4.

However, it is seen that in Ext.P5 the 2nd respondent stated that the petitioner did

not start the work and did not take any steps even against the notices issued by

them.

2. In the circumstances of the case, the petitioner would be free to

approach the 2nd respondent with a representation withn a period of two weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the 2 nd respondent shall

consider it and pass orders after affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner within a further period of one month. Till such time, no coercive action

shall be taken against the petitioner.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)

rtr/

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE DATED 17.6.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH A COPY TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 20.11.20.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 9.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO DIM-4106/2018 DATED 19.2.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.