Dismissed

Mathew Joseph v. Government of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jun 2019WP(C)/352/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a contractor, sought directions for the release of unpaid final bills for road work completed per agreement. The court noted that an earlier judgment directed the authority, which had subsequently passed an adverse order against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Directions were not granted; the petition was dismissed as the State had acted on earlier court directions, but the petitioner retains liberty to challenge the adverse order.

Mathew Joseph Vs Government of Kerala — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 29TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.352 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

MATHEW JOSEPH AGED 55 YEARS S/O K.T. JOSEPH, CONTRACTOR, KINATTUKARA HOUSE, KALAKETTY.P.O, KONDOOR VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.P.T.ABHILASH

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001.

¶11

2 THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD(ROADS AND BRIDGES) SOUTH CIRCLE, MUSEUM.P.O, THRIUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶12

3 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD(ROADS AND BRIDGES), SOUTH CIRCLE, MUSEUM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶13

4 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD, ROADS AND BRIDGES DIVISION, KOTTAYAM-686 001.

¶14

5 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD, ROADS SUB DIVISION, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 604.

¶15

6 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER

¶16

PWD, ROADS SECTION, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT686 604.

¶17

WP(C).No.352 of 2019

¶18

¶19

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. VINITHA

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No.352 of 2019

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Petitioner is a Contractor, having A Class registration, was engaged by the Stage Government to carry out improvements to Kaduthuruty-Njeezhoor Road at Ch.0/00 to 5/550. The case projected by the petitioner is that, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement, the work was completed, however, the final bills submitted by the petitioner was not considered and the money is not released. Thereupon, petitioner has approached this Court and secured Ext.P12 judgment in W.P.(C)No.36071/2018 dated 7.11.2018. The case put forth by the petitioner in this writ petition is, in spite of conduct of hearing in accordance with the directions in Ext.P12 judgment, no final orders are passed. It is thus seeking appropriate directions, this writ petition is filed.

¶25

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶26

No much serious deliberation of the matter is required, since the learned Government Pleader has produced an order dated 29.5.2019 passed by the State Government pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P12 judgment. I am also informed that the order is passed against the petitioner.

¶27

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is dismissed, leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the order dated

¶28

WP(C).No.352 of 2019

¶29

¶30

29.5.2019 if aggrieved and advised so. The question of facts and law if any raised in this writ petition regarding the issue will remain left open.

¶31

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

Jm/

WP(C).No.352 of 2019

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT NO.25/SFSC/2015- 16 DATED 10-07-2015 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO.DB.14(II)- 1135/2014 DATED 11-07-2015 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE SCHEDULE OF WORK INVOLVED IN EXT.P1 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DB. 11-1135/2014 DATED 2-4-2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 A	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22-9-2016 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE TYPED COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3-10-2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO.D.B.11/1135/2014 DATED 24-10-2017 OF THE 4RD RESPONDENT FORWARDED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO.PWD- G1/51/2016-PWD DATED 16-04-2018 OF THE IST RESPONDENT FORWARDED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18- 11-2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE TYPED COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22-06-2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14-08-2018 IN WPC NO.25782/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P10 A	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-10-2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1-11-

¶41

WP(C).No.352 of 2019

¶42

¶43

2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶44

EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7-11-2018 IN W.P.C.NO.36071/2018 OF THIS HONORABLE COURT. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 2011-2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Mathew Joseph v. Government of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathew Joseph v. Government 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

Dr.Toney Jose Vs the Principal

Dr.Rekha Chandran Vs the Principal, Government Medical College

Nimmy R.Krishnan Vs the Principal

Sivaprasad, Vs Bennychen.P.Thomas

Tetra Queens Distilleries and Braveries Private Limited Vs the Managing Director, Kerala State Beverages Corporation

Celina Paily Vs Ajitha Vijayan