LAWS(KER)-2017-12-246

C.P. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On December 08, 2017
C.P. Muraleedharan Nair Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is stated to be the Convenor of a Committee constituted under the Peoples Planning Programme to implement a project in the 3rd respondent Panchayat, has approached this Court aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in reimbursing the petitioner for the payments that were made by him, from his own pocket, in connection with the aforesaid project. The facts in the writ petition would indicate that the Ernakulam District Scheduled Cast Development Officer had on 26.03.2012, sanctioned an amount of Rs. 19,90,025/- for the development of Chettayil Lakshamveedu Colony within the territorial limits of the 3rd respondent Panchayat. Out of the said amount, an amount of Rs. 8,40,000/- was the amount sanctioned for construction of the road called the Chettayil Lakshamveedu Colony road as also for the protection of the side walls of the said road. After the estimate prepared by the Assistant Executive Engineer was routed through the necessary Department for getting the technical sanction, the technical sanction was obtained, and thereafter, a meeting of the beneficiaries of the project was convened when a Committee was constituted and the petitioner was selected as the Convenor of the Committee. On the basis of the decision of the 3rd respondent Committee, the 4th respondent executed an agreement as well as a supplement agreement with the petitioner and an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- was given as mobilisation advance. The petitioner, thereafter, completed the work by borrowing funds from private financiers and after completion of the work, the Assistant Engineer, LSGD Section conducted inspection and prepared the final bill in accordance with the M book. Thereafter, the Assistant Engineer issued a letter to the 4th respondent to complete and process the bill so as to effect payments to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the completion certificate and the report submitted by the Engineer, the 3rd respondent was not disburse the amount due to the petitioner till date. It is further stated that the 1st respondent has already issued a direction to the 2nd respondent to disburse the amounts to the petitioner as borne out by Ext.P9 order dated 06.05.2017. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent also on the basis of Ext.P9 order, directed the 4th respondent to disburse the amounts to the petitioner by Ext.P10 order. It is the case of the petitioner that despite Exts.P9 and P10, the petitioner has still not been paid the amounts that are due to him.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Standing counsel for respondents 3 and 4 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I find from Exts.P9 and P10 that the liability of the 3rd and 4th respondents to pay the amounts to the petitioner is not disputed and as a matter of fact, the said orders would clearly indicate that the petitioner is entitled to the amounts from the 3rd and 4th respondents. The learned Standing counsel for the 3rd and 4th respondents would submit that there is only a technical problem in inclusion of the amounts in the Plan Monitoring Software that is operational in the various Panchayats and it is on account of the technical problems faced that the respondents are not able to release the payments due to the petitioner. Taking note of the said submission and finding that the payments, which are admittedly due to the petitioner cannot be unduly delayed, I dispose the writ petition by directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to ensure that the payments due to the petitioner are made available to him after curing the technical defects, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 3rd and 4th respondents for further action.