JUDGMENT :

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to disburse an amount of Rs.7,50,758/-to the petitioners in connection with the contract work carried out by their father; and for a further writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay 12% of interest on the amount due to the petitioners from the date of submission of the bill to the date of payment.

2. Brief material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

The petitioners' father was a PWD Contractor. The respondents awarded the work of construction of a protection wall on the bank of Karamana river to one PWD contractor K. Muraleedharan. But, the said contractor could not execute the work and thereupon, he executed a power of attorney assigning the work in the name of the petitioner’s father and accordingly with the permission of the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Department, Thiruvananthapuram—respondent No.2, an agreement was executed by the petitioners' father. The issue arose when the original contractor Sri. K. Muraleedharan was imposed with a liability by the respondents in some other contract. The Government attempted to recover the liability of K. Muraleedharan from t