Disposed

R.Anantha Narayanan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Aug 2017WP(C)/24517/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contractor filed a writ petition concerning delay in receiving admitted payments for work executed under the Kuttanad Package. The Court held that paucity of funds is not a valid reason for indefinite delay, directing respondent authorities to disburse 50% by September 30, 2017, and the balance by November 15, 2017.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to disburse 50% of admitted dues by 30.09.2017 and the balance by 15.11.2017.

R.Anantha Narayanan Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/25TH SRAVANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 24517 of 2017 (L) ----------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

R.ANANTHA NARAYANAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, POONAM GRAH NIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED, MANIMADOM, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER HARISH CHANDRAN, PUTHENPURACKAL THARAYIL, SOORANADU NORTH P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.JOMY GEORGE SRI.DEEPAK MOHAN SMT.A.MINI JOSEPH SMT.LIZA POWELL

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

1.	STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2.	THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES (IR) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3.	THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY FINANCE (BUDGET) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4.	THE CHIEF ENGINEER KUTTANAD PACKAGE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 009.
5.	THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER KUTTANAD DEVELOPMENT CIRCLE, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA - 689 121.
6.	EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA - 689 121.
	BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI SURIN GEORGE IPE
THIS ON 1 FOLLO	WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION 6-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE WING:

¶10

K.V.

¶11

WP(C).No. 24517 of 2017 (L)

¶12

APPENDIX

¶13

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶14

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE DATED 27.3.2015 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT AGREEMENT DATED 10.4.2015.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT CERTIFYING THE DETAILS OF THE BILLS SCHEDULED FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.8.2016 TO 31.8.2016.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT CERTIFYING THE DETAILS OF THE BILLS SCHEDULED FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.10.2016 TO 31/10/2016.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT CERTIFYING THE DETAILS OF THE BILLS SCHEDULED FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.12.2016 TO 31.12.2016.
EXHIBIT P6	THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT CERTIFYING THE DETAILS OF THE BILL SCHEDULED FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.2.2017 TO 28.2.2017.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 17.10.2016 BEFORE THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 24.11.2016 AND 28.1.2017 BEFORE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P7(B)	THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDNET DATED 28.1.2017 BEFORE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE BILLS SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNMENT AFTER 15.8.2016 ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 11.7.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.6.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' --------------	EXHIBITS NIL ---------

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

K.V.

P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶19

W.P.(C) No.24517 of 2017

¶20

Dated this the 16^th day of August, 2017

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner is a contractor. He has executed

¶23

a work of the State Government under the Kuttanad Package. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the respondents concerned in disbursing the admitted amounts due in respect of the work executed by him.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

¶25

The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has executed the work satisfactorily. The reason stated by the learned

¶26

W.P.(C) No.24517 of 2017

¶27

-2-

¶28

Government Pleader for the delay in disbursing the amounts due to the petitioner is only paucity of funds.

¶29

Paucity of funds cannot be a reason for

¶30

delaying the payments due to the petitioner indefinitely

¶31

after having extracted the work from him, that too by the State.

¶32

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents concerned to disburse 50% of the amounts payable to the petitioner in respect of the work referred to in the writ petition on or before 30.09.2017 and the balance on or before 15.11.2017.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

P.B. SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶35

bpr

R.Anantha Narayanan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Anantha Narayanan v. State of Kerala

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

R. Narayanan Potti Vs P.H. Kurien

Ayra K.S. Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

M/S Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. Vs the Station House Officer

Master Abhishek V.R Vs the State of Kerala

Madhu Vs General Manager, Ksfe Ltd.

Souparnika Rajeswari.a.S Vs the Entrance Commissioner