Kerala High Court
The Chief Executive Officer Kiifb vs T.A Abdul Rahiman on 23 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
RP NO. 399 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 14-05-2021 IN WP(C) 10838/2021 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
REVIEW PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT:
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD (KIIFB)
2ND FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, STATUE, PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY ADVS.
V.G.ARUN (K/795/2004)
V.JAYA RAGI
NEERAJ NARAYAN
R.HARIKRISHNAN (KAMBISSERIL)
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1, 3 & 4:
1 T.A ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED 69 YEARS
PWD CONTRACTOR, S/O. MAHIN HAJI, RESIDING AT JASMIN
HOUSE, POST THEKKIL -671 541, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, KERALA.
2 MUHAMMED JANIF T.A,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O. T.A. ABDUL RAHIMAN, RESIDING AT JASMIN HOUSE, POST
THEKKIL-671 541, CHETTANCHAL, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, KERALA.
3 THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT (PMU-KRFB), TC 4/1654, MAYOORAM
NO. 7, BELHAVEN ROAD, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003
4 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
PWD ROADS DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
PWD ROADS DIVISION, KANNUR-670 003, KERALA.
R.P No.399/2021 -2-
5 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA,
SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
BY ADV T. ASAF ALI
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI K.V. MANOJ KUMAR (SC, KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD)
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.09.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P No.399/2021 -3-
ORDER
This review petition is filed seeking a review of the judgment dated 14-05-2021
through which a direction had been issued to the 1 st respondent in the writ petition to
consider Ext.P8 taking note of the Exts.P4, P6 & P7. This review petition was filed by
the Chief Executive Officer of the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board
(KIIFB) (herein after referred to as 'KIIFB' for short) stating that the project in
question is one funded by KIIFB and that as per the general practice followed by KIIFB
the practice of submitting and sanctioning bills on the basis of a power of attorney
executed by the original contractor is not permitted. It is submitted that this is to
prevent any transfer of work allotted to a particular contractor to any other third
person. I need only observe that it is open to KIIFB to impose any condition in projects
funded by them to prevent any malpractice. This is a case where the contractor had
executed a power of attorney in favour of his son authorising him to submit bills etc.
Bills submitted by the contractor's son on the strength of power of attorney had earlier
been processed and paid. It was in these circumstances that a direction was issued to
the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P8 in the light of earlier proceedings. Though the
Kerala Road Fund Board is not a party to the proceedings, I have heard Sri. K.V. Manoj
Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Road Fund Board who states that
the Project Director is competent to consider the request of the writ petitioner. The
learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner would submit that when a decision
is taken by the 1st respondent the views of the KIIFB may be taken into consideration.
Though such a direction is not within the scope of a review petition, taking into
consideration the over all facts and circumstances of this case a decision shall be taken
as directed in the judgment dated 14-05-2021 after ascertaining the views of the
KIIFB. The 1st respondent shall consider the matter and take a decision as directed
within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Subject to the above observation this review petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
AMG
