Disposed

Mr. Jamal v. District Collector

Kerala HC27 Sept 2016WP(C)/27427/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner supplied drinking water to Government Ayurveda College Hospital on a credit basis. The District Collector failed to act on a representation seeking release of dues. The Court directed the 1st Respondent to decide on the representation within three weeks, releasing dues if no legal impediment exists.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Collector to decide on the petitioners representation and release the due amount within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Mr. Jamal Vs District Collector — Kerala HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/5TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

W.P.(C).No. 27427 of 2016 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

MR. JAMAL, PROPRIETOR, MALABAR DRINKING WATER SUPPLIERS, CHITTETHUKARA, CSEZ P.O.. KOCHI-37

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.A.K.SRINIVASAN SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN SRI.A.S.BENOY SMT.PRIYA DEVI.P

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN-682 030

¶11

ERNAKULAM.

¶12

2. GOVT. AYURVEDA COLLEGE HOSPITAL, THRIPPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682 301 REP. BY ITS SUPERINTENDENT

¶13

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT,

¶14

GOVT. AYURVEDA COLLEGE HOSPITAL,

¶15

THRIPPUNITHURA,

¶16

ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 301

¶17

4. THE THAHSILDAR, THALUK OFFICE, KANAYANNUR - 682 011

¶18

5. THRIPPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY, THRIPPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM REP. BY ITS SECRETARY - 682 301

¶19

6. STATE OF KERALA, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT

¶20

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001

¶21

R1 TO R4 AND R6 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER -

¶22

SRI.T.K.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU

¶23

R5 BY ADV.SRI.V.M.KURIAN, SC FOR THRIPPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-092016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

WP(C).No. 27427 of 2016 (C)

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶28

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9/06/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶29

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B/657/2015 DATED 22/6/2015 SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶30

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/6/2015 SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶31

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 3/07/2015 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶32

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

//True Copy//

P.A. To Judge

SHAJI P.CHALY, J.

¶38

W.P.(C).No.27427 of 2016

¶39

....................................................... Dated this, the 27^th day of September, 2016.

¶40

J U D G ME N T

¶41

Petitioner supplied drinking water to the 2^nd respondent Government Ayurveda College Hospital, Thripunithura, as requested by the respondents. Since its supply was urgent, the same was supplied on credit basis on the undertaking that the amounts will be paid to the petitioner. As per the request of the respondents, petitioner had supplied 145 loads of water at the rate of Rs.1,200/- per load during the period from 21.02.2015 to 14.05.2015. According to the petitioner, the bills were countersigned by the 2^nd respondent. That apart, it is also stated that respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 requested the 1^st respondent to pass an amount of Rs.1,74,000/- towards charges of drinking water. But, in spite of the request made by the petitioner as per

¶42

W.P.(C).No.27427 of 2016 : 2 :

¶43

Ext.P1 and the communication forwarded by the Superintendent of 2^nd respondent Hospital to the Municipal Chairman enumerating the amount due to the petitioner, the same is not considered by the 1^st respondent.

¶44

For and on behalf of the 3^rd respondent, a statement is filed, in which, it is stated that the 2^nd respondent Institution underwent severe water shortage and patients were on strike and the institution became a venue for various political agitations. Accordingly, 1^st respondent visited the institution on 18.02.2015 along with Tahsildar and Village Officer concerned and an urgent meeting was convened. In the meeting, Principal, Government Ayurveda College informed that a marginal amount of Rs.7,000/- is only allotted for the year 2015-16 budget under the Head of Account - Water Charges, which is highly insufficient for the same. On realising the situation, the 1^st respondent offered immediate relief with respect to the water scarcity by

¶45

W.P.(C).No.27427 of 2016 : 3 :

¶46

directing the Tahsildar to provide two tanker trip per day (drinking water) to this institution from the package of Disaster Management Fund in respect of Revenue Department. It was accordingly, petitioner has supplied the water to the 2^nd respondent Hospital.

¶47

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality, perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth by the respective parties.

¶48

What is discernible from Ext.P2, a communication issued by the Hospital to the Municipal Authorities is that, petitioner has supplied 145 loads of water amounting to Rs.1,74,000/-. Therefore, according to the petitioner, petitioner is entitled to get the charges for the water supply made and in that view of the matter only petitioner has

¶49

W.P.(C).No.27427 of 2016 : 4 :

¶50

submitted Ext.P1 before the District Collector who is to release the amount from the Disaster Management Fund.

¶51

Taking note of the submissions made across the bar, I am satisfied that there is a grievance put forth by the petitioner which is to be considered at the earliest by the 1^st respondent. I do not think that much dispute is raised with respect to the supply of the water made by the petitioner and the amount due to the petitioner from the 2^nd respondent. Therefore, I think it is only appropriate that a direction is issued to the 1^st respondent, to take a decision on Ext.P1 taking note of Ext.P2 communication dated 22.06.2015 issued by the Superintendent of the 2^nd respondent to the Municipal Chairman, Thripunithura Municipality and take a decision on the same within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, if there are no other legal impediments and if the petitioner has actually supplied the water and the

¶52

W.P.(C).No.27427 of 2016 : 5 :

¶53

money is due to the petitioner, the same shall be released to the petitioner without any much delay and at any rate, within three weeks from the passage of the order by the District Collector, so directed.

¶54

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY,

JUDGE

Bb/27/09/2016

[True copy]

P.A to Judge

Mr. Jamal v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Jamal v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Danu Maheendran Vs State of Kerala

Mariyakutty Vs the Tahsildar

K v Mohanan @ Mohankumar Vs the State of Kerala

The Managing Committee, Tiruvalla East Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the State Co-Operative Election Commission

Arumughan Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

C.P.Manilal Vs the Deputy Tahasildar