Liju P.Rajan vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 8834 Ker

WP(C).No.6908 OF 2021(K)
                                     1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

  WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.6908 OF 2021(K)


PETITIONER/S:

                LIJU P.RAJAN
                AGED 41 YEARS
                GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, K.J.K.INFRA, CROWN-2A,
                TRINITY APARTMENT, EDAPALLY, KOCHI - 682 024.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.K.BABU THOMAS
                SMT.MARYKUTTY BABU

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         THE STATE OF KERALA,REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO
                GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 985 001.

      2         THE CHIEF ENGINEER
                P.W.D.BUILDINGS, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.

      3         THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.W.D.BUILDINGS, SOUTH
                CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.

      4         THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                P.W.D.BUILDINGS DIVISION, ALAPUZHA - 688 007.


OTHER PRESENT:

                SMT.VINITHA.B, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.6908 OF 2021(K)
                                              2




                                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 17th day of March 2021

The petitioner is a Contractor, who was awarded the work of

"Construction of a new building for Government Ayurveda

Hospital, Chengennur - Phase -1" for which Ext.P1 agreement was

executed on 08.11.2017. It is stated that even though the time

of completion was fixed as 24 months, the time was extended and

even now the work is not completed on account of reasons beyond

the control of the petitioner. According to the petitioner,

delay occurred on account of non finalisation of altered design

and drawings. The petitioner points out that there has been

enhancement in the rates and it is difficult to continue the

work at the rates as fixed at the time when the agreement was

executed. Pointing out the same he has submitted Ext.P5

representation before the 1st respondent requesting payment for

the work carried out so far and also for relieving the

petitioner by closing the agreement or else to enhance the

rates.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Babu Thomas

submits that the petitioner would be satisfied with a direction

to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation.

3. Accordingly, the writ Petition is disposed of, directing

the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 and to pass orders after WP(C).No.6908 OF 2021(K)

affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a

period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the

judgment. It is made clear that hearing can be held through

electronic mode.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

                                            P.V.ASHA

rkc                                          JUDGE
 WP(C).No.6908 OF 2021(K)




                           APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1           TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF THE

AGREEMENT INCLUDING LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND AND 4TH RESPONDENTS.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.