M.V. POULOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a contractor who has executed certain works and seeking for quashing Ext.P8 order and Ext.P8(a) letter, this writ petition has been filed. The work in question was completed by the petitioner and certain part bills were sanctioned also. But at the time of pendency of the final bills, a complaint was filed by one Shri P.L. Jacob to the third respondent based on which a vigilance enquiry has been ordered. In the meanwhile, in the light of the pendency of the vigilance enquiry, the first respondent decided to disburse 50% of the payment due to all the contractors and withheld the balance amount pending finalisation of the vigilance enquiry. As far as the petitioner is concerned, an amount of Rs.7,96,962/- was disbursed and an equal amount was withheld. In the light of the delay that had occurred in completion of the vigilance enquiry, the petitioner along with others had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.22656/2007 wherein a direction was issued to disburse the payment due to the petitioners therein after getting bank guarantee. Later, the petitioners therein had to file a Contempt Case for implementing the directions, as C.O.(C) No.1587/2008. After filing of the said Contempt Case, the amount was disbursed to the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P2 bank guarantee. Another amount of Rs.83,400/- being the security deposit, was also disbursed.

(2.) The present disputes arose when, as per Ext.P3 the third respondent instructed the Bank to make good the liability amount of Rs.2,02,233/- and security amount of Rs.83,400/-, totaling Rs.2,85,633/- to be credited by D.D. within one week. The petitioner's contention appears to be that no report of the vigilance enquiry has been received and there is no intimation regarding the fixation of liability against the petitioner. He therefore filed W.P.(C) No.31471/2010 before this Court which was disposed of directing the petitioner to treat Ext.P3 as a show cause notice and to offer explanation. An objection was later filed as Ext.P5. Further communications followed and finally by Ext.P8 it was ordered to realise the liability in full from the bank guarantee produced by the petitioner. Ext.P8 (a) is a copy of the letter addressed to the fourth respondent to take necessary steps to realise an amount of Rs.2,85,633/-.

(3.) This Court, while admitting the writ petition, has passed an interim order which is continuing.