P.P.JOHNY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue pertains to the implementation of the Comprehensive Coconut Development Programme in Nedumbassery Grama Panchayath during the year 1994-95. The developmental work in the instant case is the widening and deepening of an existing canal and the construction of a new pump house. The Government has to meet 85% of the expenditure and the remaining 15% has to be met by the beneficiaries under the programme in question. It is conceded that a sum of about Rs. 9,79,000/- (Rupees nine lakhs seventy nine thousand only) was expended for the work to be borne by the government and the beneficiaries in the ratio aforesaid.

(2.) THE petitioner relies on Ext.P5 certificate issued by the President of the Panchayath to contend that the entire work is completed. The second respondent however issued Exts.P7 and P10 notices alleging that an excess amount of Rs.39,945/-(Rupees thirty nine thousand nine hundred and forty five only) has been drawn for the project. A reading of Exts.P7 and P10 notices would indicate that the rest of the amount was utilized for the developmental work under the programme.

(3.) THE most intriguing question is as to how the petitioner could be mulcted with the liability if any. The claim of the government is rested on Exts.P2 and P2(a) agreements executed in regard to the implementation of the project. Ext.P2 is an agreement entered into between the second respondent and the fifth respondent and Ext.P2(a) is an agreement executed between the second respondent and one Mr.Babu. It appears that Mr.Babu undertook to complete the project after the fifth respondent abandoned the work midway. The said Mr. Babu also abandoned the work and the petitioner being a retired school master of that locality shouldered the responsibility for the mere sake of completion of work for the residents.