High Court Kerala High Court

M/S. Madathil Constructions vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
M/S. Madathil Constructions vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17228 of 2008(A)


1. M/S. MADATHIL CONSTRUCTIONS, ENGINEERS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF ENGINEER,

3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :14/07/2008

 O R D E R
                         S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                ------------------------------------
                   W.P.(C)No.17228 OF 2008
              ----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 14th day of July, 2008

                            JUDGMENT

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P8 order,

whereby the contract awarded to the petitioner has been

terminated and the Government has directed to re-arranged the

work with the rider that the loss sustained to the Government

due to re-arrangement of the work will be recovered from the

petitioner by resort to proceedings under the Revenue Recovery

Act. It is also directed therein that the security deposit furnished

by the petitioner for the work would be forfeited to the

Government. Against the same, the petitioner has filed Ext.P9

representation before the Government. The petitioner seeks a

direction to the Government to consider the same.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also.

The learned Government Pleader submits that if the petitioner is

prepared to continue the work without seeking revision of rates,

the 1st respondent is prepared to consider Ext.P9. This condition

is agreeable to the petitioner.

W.P.(c)No.17228/08 2

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a

direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P9 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period

of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the

petitioner. I make it clear that this is subject to the condition

that the petitioner is prepared to continue the work without

raising any claim for revision of rates.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd

W.P.(c)No.17228/08 3