Diya Constructions vs Kerala Water Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 600 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

    THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.26796 OF 2020(Y)


PETITIONER:

               DIYA CONSTRUCTIONS
               33/3341A, KAKKANATT, THOTTILPEEDIKA,
               CHEVARAMBALAM P. O., KOZHIKODE - 673017,
               REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER JOSEPH K. D.,
               AGED 65 YERS, S/O. DEVASIA.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY
               SRI.ANIL GEORGE
               SHRI.DAJISH JOHN
               SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN P.

RESPONDENTS:

      1        KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
               REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
               JALABHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.

      2        THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
               OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
               KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
               WS DIVISION, KANNUR - 670012.

               BY SHRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION              ON
07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.26796 OF 2020(Y)

                                      2




                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner, who was awarded the work of State

Plan 2019-20-Optimization of production and

transmission-Pipe line extension from Mowenchery to

Chakkarakkal Town and branch road Munderi and

Chembilode Panchayaths had executed Ext.P1 agreement,

has approached the second respondent with Ext.P2

representation requesting to relieve him from the

agreement on the ground that the respondents could

not get the permission for cutting the road though

petitioner had procured all materials for starting

the work and that the agreement period is already

over.

2. Learned Standing Counsel on instructions

submitted that road cutting permit has since been

obtained. However since the petitioner has approached

the second respondent with Ext.P2 representation, the

writ petition is disposed of directing the second WP(C).No.26796 OF 2020(Y)

respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2

representation, after affording an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner, within a period of 'two

weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of the

judgment.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA, JUDGE AS WP(C).No.26796 OF 2020(Y)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 11.11.2019 SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.11.2020 GIVEN TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT LETTER.