The petitioner challenges Ext.P10 order passed by the Government pursuant to a direction issued by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment in WP(C).No.19342/2012. The petitioner claims that though he was awarded with certain works by the fourth respondent, and he has done the work he was not paid the remuneration. The petitioner submits that when he made enquiries, he was told that the said work was done by the fifth respondent and he has not done any such work.
2. While considering the representation of the petitioner the Government formed an opinion that the petitioner has not produced any details of work which was awarded to him, without which they are unable to verify the correctness of the claim made by the petitioner. It is also indicated that by letter dated 31.5.2013 and 18.6.2013 the Wild Life Warden, Idukki has informed that no records were WP(C).No.15351/2014-T.
2 available with them to support the claim of the petitioner. Since appropriate enquiry has already been conducted in this matter and in the absence of any further material, there is no necessity to reconsider the issue as projected by the petitioner, especially since the work is alleged to have been done during 1989-1990.
In the above facts and circumstances of the case there being no merit in the writ petition, the same is dismissed.
Kvs/-
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, (Judge) // true copy // PA TO JUDGE.