Remanded

Vinod Kumar R. v. the Superintending Engineer

Kerala HC9 Apr 2018WP(C)/3974/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a contractor's license by the Superintending Engineer of KWA, the judge noted insufficient material to decipher facts. The court allowed the petitioner to submit a representation to the suit impleaded Chairman for a final decision.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner at liberty to submit representation before the Chairman within three weeks for final decision to be reached through consultation within one month.

Vinod Kumar R. Vs the Superintending Engineer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 3974 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

VINOD KUMAR R., KOICKALETH HOUSE, ADINADU SOUTH, KATTIKADAU P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690542.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.V.VARGHESE SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND SMT.K.N.REMYA SMT.L.ANNAPOORNA

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

1. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P. H. CIRCLE, KOLLAM.

¶11

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P. H. DIVISION, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691506.

¶12

3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P. H. DIVISION, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691536.

¶13

*ADDL. 4TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED:

¶14

4. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

ADDL. 4TH RESPONDENT IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 9.4.2018.

¶16

BY SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

WP(C).No. 3974 of 2018 (V)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S REGISTRATION CARD ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/DB12246/2014 DATED 18.10.2016 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH RELEVANT EXTRACT OF ITS ENCLOSURES.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE FIRST RESPONDENT ON 01.11.2016.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DB2-562/2015(II) DATED 29.11.2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE ENCLOSED MINUTES.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.11.2016 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED 30.11.2016.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/D1-595/2010 DATED 26.12.2016 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. DB2-562/2015 DATED 29.12.2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.01.2017 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.01.2017 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. M6-79305/16 DATED 04.02.2017 OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. (IN-CHARGE).
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/DB1-2246/2014 DATED 10.04.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENT.
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.05.2017 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.KWA/PHC/DB1-2246/2014 DATED 19.07.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P15	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.07.2017 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P16	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/DB1-2246/2014 DATED 21.07.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶23

WP(C).No. 3974 of 2018 (V)

¶24

EXHIBIT P17	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.07.2017 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P18	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.08.2017 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P19	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/DB1/2246/2014 DATED 21.08.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P20	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/DB1-2246/2014 DATED 16.09.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P21	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.KWA/PHC/Q/DB1-2246/14 DATED 12.12.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P22	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.KWA/PHCQ/E6-3566/97 DATED 12.01.2018 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P23	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.08.2003 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER SUPPLY DIVISION, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, KOLLAM.
EXHIBIT P24	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 07.03.2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P25	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 01.07.2009 ISSUED BY THE PROJECT DIRECTOR TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P26	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 30.07.2013 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P27	TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE DATED 07.01.2015 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P28	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 27.02.2017 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P29	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KWA/PHC/Q/DB1-2246/2014 (PART I) DATED 01.12.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶26

NIL

¶27

TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE

¶28

EL 11.4.2018

¶29

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶30

W.P.(C). No. 3974 OF 2018

¶31

Dated this the 09^th day of April, 2018

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

Petitioner is an A class contractor engaged by the

¶34

Water Authority to carry out a work, as per Ext.P3 agreement executed on 01.11.2016. Without making any elaborate discussion on issues raised by the petitioner, to put it short, action was initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P19, alleging that the petitioner has not commenced the work, in accordance with the terms of the agreement. Anyhow, it finally culminated in Ext.P22 order passed by the Superintending Engineer cancelling the license of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, Ext.P22 is passed by the Superintending Engineer without taking into account the case projected by the petitioner. However, I am of the considered opinion that Ext.P22 is passed taking into account various factual circumstances and arrived at a conclusion, relying upon the same. Therefore, this Court may not be in a position

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 3974 OF 2018

¶36

¶37

to decipher the facts already considered by the first respondent and arrive at a different conclusion than the one arrived by the first respondent.

¶38

That being the situation, I suggested the petitioner to make a representation to the Chairman of the Water Authority to which the petitioner has agreed. Therefore, the Chairman, Kerala Water Authority, Thiruvananthapuram is suo motu impleaded as the additional fourth respondent in the writ petition.

¶39

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

¶40

the case and hearing the respective counsel at the Bar, petitioner is at liberty to submit a representation before the additional fourth respondent, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, who will consider the same, after securing the participation of the petitioner and attain finality, within one month thereafter.

¶41

The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.

¶42

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶43

DCS

Vinod Kumar R. v. the Superintending Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar R. v. the Superintending Engineer

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

Thomas M v Vs a.Hemachandran, I.P.S. Managing Director, Ksrtc

Tathakutty Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

M/S. Kothamangalam Aggregates Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Csi All Saint'S Church Vs George.a.J

M.P.Jackson Vs State of Kerala

Ashok G. Thirikkoth @ T. Ashok Kumar Vs Union of India