IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10311 of 2006(C)
1. S.RAMESAN, S/O. SREEDHARAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
3. PROJECT OFFICER,
4. PURAKKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
For Petitioner :SRI.PEARLY JOSE
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :07/11/2008
O R D E R
V.GIRI, J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C).No.10311 of 2006
-------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of November, 2008.
JUDGMENT
The Government took possession of 415 acres of
paddy field in Purakkad Panchayat by name Manakkal
Padasekharam lying in the Purakkad Grama Panchayat area for
implementation of Gandhi Samridhi Van Programme. It seems
that the project was meant for removal of water weeds, water
hyacinth and other aquatic plants.
2. Going by the statement filed by the Panchayat, 8
persons died due to snake bite. The project conceived in 3
phases was for removal of water weeds from the area coming
under the project. The petitioner was elected as the convener.
He executed an agreement on 1.2.2003. The work started on
2.2.2008. Though there is a dispute as to whether the first
phase has been completed to the utmost satisfaction of all
persons concerned, there is no dispute that the first phase has
actually been completed.
W.P.(C).NO.10311/06
:: 2 ::
3. Going by the counter affidavit filed by the
department, the first phase work was completed on 29.3.2003
and a bill for an amount of Rs.9,17,867/- was admitted by the
Assistant Executive Engineer. A total quantity of 110 Mts of
food grains were released to the Purakkad Grama Panchayat
for release to the convener of the work. It is now common
case that a quantity of 54.634 MTs paddy is yet to be
released to the convener. This aspect is mentioned in Ext.P6
representation, which is pending before the 3rd respondent
District Collector, who is competent to take a decision in this
regard.
4. It is also not disputed that the cash component
for the work done had been check measured and the bill
amount for Rs.9,17,867/- is to be released, but it is yet to be
released. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there is no decision for the release of the cash component to
the Panchayat.
W.P.(C).NO.10311/06
:: 3 ::
5. Going by the statement filed on behalf of the
4th respondent, I do not find any justification offered for the
non-disbursal of the cash component to the convener,
inasmuch as first phase of the work had been completed and
the bill has been admitted and passed by the Assistant
Executive Engineer.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of
directing the 4th respondent to release to the petitioner the
cash component for the work done as admitted under approval
of the Assistant Executive Engineer, within one month from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The second
respondent shall consider and take appropriate action on
Ext.P6 within two months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment.
Sd/-
(V.GIRI)
JUDGE
sk/
//true copy//
W.P.(C).NO.10311/06
:: 4 ::