K I KURIAKOSE Vs. ANGAMALY MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Alleging that there has been irregularities on the part of the Municipality in the matter of awarding contract for installation of sodium vapor lamps, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 complaint before the third respondent, the Superintendent, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Central Range, Ernakulam. Immediately thereafter the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 petitioner before the Government seeking action under Section 57 of the Kerala Municipality Act for canceling the resolution of the Municipality.

(2.) The 5th respondent who is the awardee of the work has filed a detailed counter affidavit producing the agreement. According to this counter affidavit, in execution of the works awarded, steps are being taken.

(3.) The Municipality has also filed a counter affidavit wherein it is contended that the present Writ Petition seeking a writ of mandamus in respect of Ext.P4 which was filed just two days prior to the institution of the Writ Petition is not maintainable.