P.K.Constructions vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 30, 2021

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1708154

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1708154
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice N.Nagaresh
Decided On: Nov 30, 2021
Case Number: WP(C)/27119/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P.K.Constructions

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....payment to the petitioner, with interest minimum at the treasury rate with effect from 1.1.2016.2. the petitioner was awarded the work for whichext.p1 selection notice was given. the petitioner executed an agreement on 16.6.2013. the work was satisfactorily completed by the petitioner on 24.12.2014. :4 :3. the 5th respondent submitted the final bill to theoffice of the 4th respondent, as is evident by ext.p3. however, this bill was not processed. exts.p4 to p6 representations submitted by the petitioner to the 4 th respondent-executive engineer did not yield any result. therefore, the petitioner submitted ext.p8 representation to the 1 st respondent. the petitioner in ext.p8 representation pointed out that his bill was not registered with the office of the executive engineer in spite of expiry of six years. the petitioner therefore, sought to provide retrospective effect to the bill as if the bill was registered on 1.1.2016, and to release the payment with priority over all other bills, with interest.3. i have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned sr.government pleader representing respondents 1 to 6.4. going through the pleadings, in the writ petitionand after hearing the arguments raised on either side, this court finds that the petitioner has completed the work undertaken by 24.12.2014. however, the respondents have :5 : not registered the bill of the petitioner. the petitioner has raised grievance before the 1st respondent. as the petitioner has already approached the 1 st respondent, this court is of the view that at the first instance, the 1 st respondent shall take a decision in the matter. in the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider ext.p8 representation submitted by the petitioner within a period of six weeks. sd/- n. nagaresh, judge al/- :6 : appendix of wp(c) 27119/2021 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the selection notice dated 20.04.2013 issued by the 4th.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, WP(C) NO. 27119 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: P.K.CONSTRUCTIONS CONTRACTORS, KOOLIYADAN BUILDINGS, MARKET ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SHEFIN K. FRANCIS, S/O. K. J. FRANCIS, AGED 33 YEARS, KOOLIYADAN HOUSE, MARKET ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA, TRIPUNITHURA P. O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA M.G.SREEJITH RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2 CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS & BRIDGES) PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 3 SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS & BRIDGES) CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 101. 4 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS DIVISION) , THRIKKAKARA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 021. 5 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS SUB DIVISION) , THRIKKAKARA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 021. 6 ASSISTANT ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS SECTION) , TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 301. :2 :
OTHER PRESENT: SMT.PRINCY XAVIER SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :3 :

JUDGMENT

******************* Dated this the 30th day of November, 2021 The petitioner who is an A Class contractor undertaking works on behalf of the respondents, is before this Court seeking to direct the 4th respondent to register the bill for the work duly completed by the petitioner as early on 24.12.2014. The petitioner further seeks to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to treat that the bill for the work comprised in Ext.P1 selection notice and Agreement No.122/EE/2013-14 dated 16.6.2013, as registered on 1.1.2016, and to disburse the payment to the petitioner, with interest minimum at the treasury rate with effect from 1.1.2016.

2. The petitioner was awarded the work for which

Ext.P1 selection notice was given. The petitioner executed an agreement on 16.6.2013. The work was satisfactorily completed by the petitioner on 24.12.2014. :4 :

3. The 5th respondent submitted the final bill to the

office of the 4th respondent, as is evident by Ext.P3. However, this bill was not processed. Exts.P4 to P6 representations submitted by the petitioner to the 4 th respondent-Executive Engineer did not yield any result. Therefore, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation to the 1 st respondent. The petitioner in Ext.P8 representation pointed out that his bill was not registered with the office of the Executive Engineer in spite of expiry of six years. The petitioner therefore, sought to provide retrospective effect to the bill as if the bill was registered on 1.1.2016, and to release the payment with priority over all other bills, with interest.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Sr.Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 6.

4. Going through the pleadings, in the writ petition

and after hearing the arguments raised on either side, this Court finds that the petitioner has completed the work undertaken by 24.12.2014. However, the respondents have :5 : not registered the bill of the petitioner. The petitioner has raised grievance before the 1st respondent. As the petitioner has already approached the 1 st respondent, this Court is of the view that at the first instance, the 1 st respondent shall take a decision in the matter. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P8 representation submitted by the petitioner within a period of six weeks. Sd/- N. NAGARESH, JUDGE al/- :6 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27119/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE DATED 20.04.2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ACCEPTED SCHEDULE OF THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 28.12.2015 ADDRESSED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.05.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.10.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01.08.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED

01.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER ATTACHED TO THE OFFICE OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09.11.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY PS TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties P.K.Constructions vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice N.Nagaresh