Gokul Das vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 16031 Ker

Kerala High Court

Gokul Das vs State Of Kerala on 7 June, 2024

Author: T.R.Ravi

Bench: T.R.Ravi

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
        FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                       WP(C) NO. 19337 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

            GOKUL DAS
            AGED 63 YEARS
            S/O SUNDARAN, SATHYASUNDHER, KOTTIYODU, ATTINGAL,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695101.

            BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
    2       THE SECRETARY
            IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
            PIN - 695001.
    3       THE DIRECTOR
            INLAND NAVIGATION DIRECTORATE, KALLADA HOUSE,
            ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 691002.
    4       CHIEF ENGINEER
            INLAND NAVIGATION DIRECTORATE, KALLADA HOUSE,
            ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 691002.
    5       EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
            OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, INLAND NAVIGATION
            DIVISION, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691002.


            SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE. GP.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 19337 OF 2024

                                       2

                            T.R. RAVI, J.
                     --------------------------------------
                     WP(C) No.19337 of 2024
                 ----------------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 07th day of June, 2024

                               JUDGMENT

The writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P5 order,

whereby the contract with the petitioner was terminated at

risk and cost. The petitioner has approached this Court after

three years contending that the work has not been re-

tendered and hence he may be allowed to complete the work.

It is claimed that he had completed 87.2% work. It can be

seen from Ext.P5 that after attaining 87% of the work in 2017,

there has been no improvement and no work done thereafter.

I do not find any reason to interfere in a case of this nature by

invoking the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.

The writ petition fails and is dismissed.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE mpm WP(C) NO. 19337 OF 2024

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19337/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.12.2014.

Exhibit P2 THE SCHEDULE OF WORK ATTACHED ALONG WITH EXT-P1.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 01.11.2019. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2021.

Exhibit P5                TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD
                          RESPONDENT           BEARING           NO.

D4-449/DIR/INDT/2013 DATED 26.08.2021. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DATED 12.10.2022 SUBMITTED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 15.04.2024.