Sujith S. vs The Commissioner Of Rural ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6436 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021/4TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                   WP(C).No.21524 OF 2020(M)


PETITIONER:

              SUJITH S., PROPRIETOR OF 'SUJITH SOLAR POWER',
              AGED 27 YEARS, S/O SURENDRAN, RESIDING AT
              VILAVINAL, NJAKKUNILAM P.O.,
              VALLIKODE-KOTTAYAM, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 656.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
              SRI.M.KIRANLAL
              SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
              SRI.T.S.SARATH
              SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR

RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT,
              4TH FLOOR, SWARAJ BHAVAN, NANTHANCODE,
              KOWDIAR P.O., THIRVANANTHAPURAM-695 003.

     2        THE ASST. DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER,
              PATHANAMTHITTA COLLECTORATE,
              PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645.

     3        THE BLOCK PANCHAYATH OF RANNI,
              RANNI P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
              PATHANAMTHITTA-689 672.

     4        THE SECRETARY, BLOCK PANCHAYATH OF RANNI,
              RANNI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-689 672.

              GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 23.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.21524/2020
                                :2 :




                        JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2021

The petitioner-Contractor has executed work of

installing solar lights complying with the specifications in

Ext.P1. However, the bill raised by the petitioner for the work

completed has not been honoured by the 4th respondent.

Ext.P3 is the bill raised by the petitioner.

2. Though notice was issued to respondents 3 and 4

and notice was served on them, there is no appearance for

respondents 3 and 4, in the writ petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the stipulated work was completed on 15.09.2020.

According to the petitioner, there was no complaint in respect

of the work executed. Still, the payment is withheld.

4. In the circumstances of the case, there will be a

direction to respondents 3 and 4 to process Ext.P3 bill in

accordance with law and take a decision in the matter within a WP(C) No.21524/2020

period of six weeks.

Writ petition is disposed of as above. The counsel

for the petitioner shall serve a copy of the writ petition and

certified copy of the judgment on respondents 3 and 4, for

compliance.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/23.02.2021 WP(C) No.21524/2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF TENDER NOTIFICATION VIDE NO.A3.3562/19/E-TENDER-1/2020-21 DATED 10.07.2020 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION OF AWARD OF TENDER TO THE PETITIONER DATED 08.08.2020.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF BILL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT NIL DATED

EXHIBIT P4 THE REPRESENTATION NIL DATED PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 THE REPRESENTATION NIL DATED PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF PRINT OUT OF EMAIL THROUGH WHICH EXT.P5 REPRESENTATION WAS GIVEN TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

ncd