Kerala High Court
George C Koottiyani vs State Of Kerala on 16 February, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 27TH MAGHA, 1945
W.P.(C) NO.2591 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
GEORGE C. KOOTTIYANI,
AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. THOMAS CHACKO,
PROPRIETOR, G.C.K. ASSOCIATES,
231A/IIIRD FLOOR, DD VYAPAR BHAVAN,
K.P. VALLON ROAD, KADAVANTHARA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 020.
BY ADVS.
THOMAS T.VARGHESE
PHILIP T.VARGHESE
ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
V.T.LITHA
K.R.MONISHA
JIJO PAUL
VISHNU SATHEESAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
3 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
1ST FLOOR, ANNEXE 2, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
4 KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
2ND FLOOR, FELICITY SQUARE, M.G ROAD,
STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
-2-
W.P.(C) NO.2591 OF 2024
5 THE CHIEF PROJECT EXAMINER,
TECHNICAL INSPECTION WING,
KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD,
2ND FLOOR, FELICITY SQUARE, M.G. ROAD,
STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
6 KITCO LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
M.M. GARDENS, P.B. NO. 1820,
CHURCH LANDING ROAD,
NEAR KERALA FINE ARTS HALL,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 016.
SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, STANDING COUNSEL
SRI.NITHIN GEORGE, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
W.P.(C) NO.2591 OF 2024
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 16th day of February, 2024
The petitioner impugns Ext.P6 order on various
grounds, but primarily that it has been issued, terminating
the contract awarded to him earlier at his risk and cost
leading to the forfeiture of the security deposit and other
amounts entitled to him, without even having afforded an
opportunity of being heard to him. He says that, even
though he has preferred Exts.P7 and P8 explanations
against the afore proposed action, the same have been
completely disregarded; and Ext.P6 order issued, violating
the procedural requirements and forensic imperatives. He
thus prays that Ext.P6 be set aside.
2. The learned Government Pleader Smt. Vidya
Kuriakose, in response to the afore submissions of
Smt. K.R. Monisha - learned counsel for the petitioner,
submitted that, since Ext.P6 has been issued by the 5 th
respondent, it is for them to answer the assertions of the
petitioner.
W.P.(C) NO.2591 OF 2024
3. I notice from the file that, even though the 5th
respondent has been properly served, there is no
appearance on their behalf, nor are they represented
through a Counsel when this matter is called today; they
inferentially guiding me to the impression that they have
nothing to offer an answer to the various allegations of the
writ petition.
4. I have examined Ext.P6 and, as rightly argued
by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it does not
contain any reflection that the petitioner had been heard,
or his Exts.P7 and P8 explanations had been considered in
his proper perspective. Obviously therefore, this Court
cannot find favour with the said proceedings.
5. In the above circumstances, I allow this writ
petition and set aside Ext.P6; with a consequential
direction to the competent Authority of the 6th respondent,
to reconsider the matter, adverting specifically to Exts.P7
and P8 explanations of the petitioner, and after affording
him an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an
appropriate order, and necessary action thereon, as
W.P.(C) NO.2591 OF 2024
expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
6. Needless to say, depending upon the decision to
be taken, the further claim of the petitioner, for refund of
the security deposit and such other entitled amount, will
be considered and the eligible amounts disbursed to him,
within a period of one month thereafter.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
bpr
W.P.(C) NO.2591 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2591/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF AWARD OF WORK
ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 09.09.2020
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 10.11.2020
EXECUTED BETWEEN PETITIONER AND 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 10.11.2020
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE
PROJECT SPECIFIC SITE ENGINEER TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 07.04.2022
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY
PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED
12.04.2022
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY
PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED
23.09.2022
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY 5TH
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED
28.10.2022
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT
DATED 14.11.2022
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT
DATED 30.12.2022
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER SUBMITTED
BY 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
DATED 20.01.2023
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER WITH
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT ( WITHOUT
ANNEXURES ) SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO
THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 30.01.2023
