Disposed

P.L Jacob v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Apr 2023WP(C)/13102/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL challenging road quality and alleged corruption in PWD works, the Court held the writ petition prayers were not maintainable and were declined. The Court, however, directed the Secretary to Government PWD to pass orders on the petitioner's representation within two months before disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposal; direction to Secretary, Govt PWD to consider Ext. P8 representation within two months.

P.L Jacob Vs State of Kerala — Corruption | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶3

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 13102 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

P.L JACOB
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O LONAPPAN, RESIDING AT PADINJAKARA HOUSE,
KUTTIKADU P.O., CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680724
BY ADVS.
T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF
NITHIN A.R.

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT(ROADS), SECRETARIAT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶9

2 DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE AND ANTICORRUPTION PMG JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

¶10

3 CHIEF ENGINEER PWD DEPARTMENT (ROADS) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶11

4 SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER PWD ROADS ALUVA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683101

¶12

5 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

¶13

PWD ROADS, CHEMBUKAVU THRISSUR, PIN - 680020

¶14

6 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD ROADS IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680121

¶15

7 ASSISTANT ENGINEER PWD ROADS, IRINJALAKUDA THRISSUR, PIN - 680121

¶16

8 ASSISTANT ENGINEER PWD ROADS, KODAKARA, PUTHUKAD P.O THRISSUR, PIN – 680301

¶17

W. P. (C) No. 13102 of 2023

¶18

-2-

¶19

9 ASSISTANT ENGINEER PWD ROADS, CHALAKKUDY THRISSUR, PIN - 680307

¶20

10 CHIEF TECHNICAL EXAMINER PWD ROADS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 698001

¶21

11 QUALITY CONTROL OFFICER PWD ROADS, CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN – 680020

¶22

12 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695001

¶23

OTHER PRESENT:

¶24

N. MANOJ KUMAR, STATE ATTORNEY

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

W. P. (C) No. 13102 of 2023

-3-

J U D G M E N T

S. Manikumar, C. J.

Instant public interest writ petition is filed for the following

¶31

reliefs:-

¶32

“i) To call for the records relating to Exhibit P-1 to P-11 and to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent to constitute an authority headed by retired Supreme Court or High Court Judges and with technical staffs with full fledged office to supervise the road works under public works department in state of Kerala for panchayat and municipality corporation roads for the purpose of releasing the road to smooth vehicular traffic by taking steps under criminal and civil law by recovering cost from the erring contractors;

¶33

ii) To issue any writ order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to enquire into the condition of roads stated in Ext.P5 and to submit report about the damages present in road covered under Ext.P5 and P6 and also to recover such damages from the contractors and their property and also by implicating them in criminal cases and also not to disburse bills regarding quality and quantity of the work done etc are assessed;

¶34

iii) To issue any writ order or direction commanding the respondents 1 and 3 that no payment shall be effected in respect of contract work done under the respondents and which can be

¶35

W. P. (C) No. 13102 of 2023

¶36

-4-

¶37

released only on such certification by the authority concerned.”

¶38

Short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as

¶39

under:-

¶40

2.1. Petitioner has submitted that the road works carried out by

¶41

the Public Works Department is of such a nature that the works when completed, will not remain without any damage of repairs and renovation works, at least for a period of one year. The amounts allotted are utilized in such a way that not even one forth of the amount is spent for the work, and the State Exchequer is the looser, which is nothing but public money, and the swindling of the same occurs in large scale. But again and again, Government is committed to carry out repairing works, and an end can be put to such practice prevalent in the particular department, only by assessing the quality of the works under the Divisions.

¶42

2.2. Petitioner has further submitted that he has filed an

¶43

application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, and obtained details of the works, and it is clear that the works that are completed, is again put under renovation, reconstruction etc. After obtaining the

¶44

W. P. (C) No. 13102 of 2023

¶45

-5-

¶46

reply, complaints are filed, but without taking into account the matter stated in the complaint, and without conducting an in-depth study about the quality of the work and measurement details etc., the contractors who committed such misappropriation and deprivation of money and property to the Government, are not proceed with at all, and hence, the complaints filed by the petitioner still remains as a prelude. It is in the said circumstances, the petitioner, in order to prevent the misutilization of the public money, and for taking appropriate action including constitution of committee etc., has approached this Court.

¶47

Today, when the matter came up for admission, Mr. N. Manoj Kumar, learned State Attorney, submitted that the prayers sought for in the writ petition are not maintainable.

¶48

Giving due consideration to the averments and the grounds, we are of the view that the prayers sought for in the writ petition are not maintainable, and therefore, they are declined.

¶49

However, we direct the Secretary to the Government, Public Works Department, Thiruvananthapuram, the 1^st respondent, to

¶50

W. P. (C) No. 13102 of 2023

¶51

-6-

¶52

consider and pass orders on Ext. P8 representation dated 17.01.2023 submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, for which there is no objection from the learned State Attorney.

¶53

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶54

Sd/S. MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE

¶55

Sd/MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶56

¶57

///TRUE COPY/// P. A. TO JUDGE

¶58

W. P. (C) No. 13102 of 2023

¶59

-7-

¶60

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13102/2023

¶61

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶62

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET NO.32/11
SUBMITTED BY VIGILANCE AND ANTI-
CORRUPTION BEAURO THRISSUR
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)
NO.11936/2004 DATED 11/11/2005
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.13632/2022
DATED 17/10/2022
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
7/2/2023 WITH ENGLISH TRANLSATION
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OBTAINED UNDER
THE RI ACT DATED 20/2/2023 WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED
28/1/2023WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/1/2023 WITH
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/2/2023 WITH
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT IN MALAYALA
MANORAMA DAILY DATED 17/2/2023 WITH
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 20/2/2023 WITH
ENGLISH TRANSLATION

P.L Jacob v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.L Jacob 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.v.Sadanandan @ K.Puram Sadanandan Vs the State of Kerala

Sarosh P. Abraham Vs Jayan V.T.

University of Kerala Vs Amal v S

Suresh @ Mankunnil Suresh Vs State of Kerala

George Vattukulam Vs Union of India

T.M.Sadan, Vs State of Kerala