Beneficiary Committee sought release of funds for completed pathway work. Court held PWD no objection exists and directed Panchayat to approve and pay petitioners within specified timelines despite fiscal year concerns.
Directing 3rd Respondent to prepare bill within two weeks; 2nd Respondent to release funds within one month of bill submission.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2017/12TH JYAISHTA, 1939
WP(C).No. 9444 of 2017 (E) ---------------------------
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS:
1. MANJU MURUKESH, CONVENER, GUNABHOKTHRU SANGAM - BENEFICIARY COMMITTEE, W/O.MURUKESH, OSATHIYOOR, PAAKULAM PO, AGALI, ATTAPPADY, MANNARKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD 678582
2. SUBRAHMANIAM, CHAIRMAN, GUNABHOKTHRU SANGAM - BENEFICIARY COMMITTEE, KOLLAMKADAVU OORU, PAAKULAM P O, AGALI, ATTAPPADY, MANNARKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD 678582.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER
SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA SMT.AMY DENNY
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. AGALI GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, AGALI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, AGALI PALAKKAD 678582.
2. SECRETARY,
3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, (LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT), AGALI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, AGALI PALAKKAD 678582.
4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD ROADS AND SUB DIVISION, MANNARKAD, PALAKKAD 678582.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN R3 & R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDAKUMAR BABU
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 9444 of 2017 (E)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE IST PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT DTD 15/3/2016 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH DICLOSING THE AREA OF WORK DTD NIL
EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ESTMATE OF THE WORK DTD NIL
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MEASUREMENT BOOK CONFIRMING THE COMPLETION OF THE SUBJECT WORK DTD NIL
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD 26/3/2016
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE IST PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 22/2/2017
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE IST PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD 10/3/2017
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVERN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD 23/2/2017
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 2/3/2017
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD 3/3/2017
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
Pn
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN,J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 9444 of 2017
- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2017
The petitioners claim to be the Convenor and Chairman of the “Gunabhokthru Sangam” – a Beneficiary Committee under the Agaly Grama Panchayat entrusted with the concreting of the Kollamkadavu Ooru pathway under the Self Employment Scheme financed by the Tribal Sub Plan of the Panchayat. They say that the beneficiaries of the work are the members of the tribal colony of Kollamkadavu and that the Panchayat had engaged them and contracted with them to do the work as per the request of the colony members.
W.P.(C) No. 9444 of 2017
-: 2 :-
the work.
the petitioners, Sri. Mohanakannan, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2, Agaly Grama Panchayat and the Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 3 and 4.
relevant since Ext.P8 order has been thereafter issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer of the PWD Division, Mannarkad on 02.03.2017, wherein he says that though
some of the work done by the Beneficiary Committee is
W.P.(C) No. 9444 of 2017
-: 3 :-
not approved by the PWD, they have no objection to the
release of the money to the Committee, taking into account the fact that the concreting of the pathway was done for public good and utility.
for respondents 1 and 2, at this point of time informs me that the work that was allotted to the petitioners was arranged out of the Plan Fund for the year 2015-16 but that the petitioners had completed the work only during 2016-17. He, therefore, has raised a small apprehension that if the Panchayat releases the amounts now from the Plan Fund of the year 2015-16, it might lead to an audit objection in future. He also says that even though the PWD had withdrawn all their objections as per Ext.P8, no specific directions had been given by
W.P.(C) No. 9444 of 2017
-: 4 :-
them to the Panchayat to release the funds.
Mr Mohanakannan, and I am certainly of the view that
since the PWD does not now have any objections against the petitioners and since it is admitted that the petitioner Committee had completed the work to the satisfaction of all the authorities, it is only fair and reasonable that they be defrayed the expenses suffered by them for completing the construction. It is admitted, as already noticed, that the Panchayat had funds for the year 2015-16 under the head of “Plan Fund” made available to them by the Government. I am also
told that the funds are still available with the Panchayat. If that be so, notwithstanding the fact that the work was completed only in 2016-17, the petitioners cannot be denied payment merely because the funds were allocated for the year 2015-16.
recorded above and also taking into account Ext.P8 No Objection issued by the PWD, I direct the 3rd
W.P.(C) No. 9444 of 2017
-: 5 :-
respondent, Assistant Engineer, Local Self Government Department of the Agaly Grama Panchayat to prepare and put up a bill for the amounts covered by the work completed by the petitioners for concreting the Kollamkadavu Ooru pathway to the 2nd respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of this bill, the 2nd respondent shall immediately thereafter release the funds to the petitioners without any further delay; but not later than one month from the date on which bill is presented before him by the 3rd respondent in terms of this judgment.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN,
DST
//True copy// P.A. To Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to payment for completed public work despite alleged encroachment fears.
Whether timing of work completion relative to fiscal year restricts fund release by the Panchayat.
MANJU MURUKESH OR OTHERS
AGALI GRAMA PANCHAYAT OR OTHERS
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
