Disposed

Anas T.I v. the Changanacherry Muncipality

Kerala HC10 Jul 2015WP(C)/2715/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the decision not to issue a tender schedule, the Court noted a pending appeal before the State Government. The Court disposed of the petition by directing the additional 3rd respondent to dispose of that appeal within two months. (Source: Para 1)

What did the court decide?

Directed the additional 3rd respondent to dispose of the pending appeal (Ext.P7) within two months.

Anas T.I Vs the Changanacherry Muncipality — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2015/19TH ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 2715 of 2015 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

ANAS T.I., S/O.T.V. ISMAIL THANKERIPEEDIKAYIL MARKET ROAD, CHANGANASSERY PIN-686 101.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI. E.S.M. KABEER

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. CHANGANACHERRY MUNCIPALITY REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY

¶11

CHANGANASSERY MUNICIPALITY – 686 101.

¶12

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL OFFICE, CHANGANASSERY – 686101.

¶13

*ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED

¶14

---------------------------------

¶15

*ADDL.R3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANHAPURAM.

¶16

*ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN IA NO. 3355/2015 DATED 10/07/2015

¶17

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR SMT.BINDU SREEDHAR SMT.R.S.MANJULA

¶18

R2 & ADDL. R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANITHA RAVEENDRAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

...2/-

¶22

WP(C).No. 2715 of 2015 (L)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶25

EXHIBIT P1:	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.7.2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P1(a):	COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P1.
EXHIBIT P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 4.8.2014.
EXHIBIT P2(a):	COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2.
EXHIBIT P3:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29.8.2014.
EXHIBIT P3(a):	COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3.
EXHIBIT P4:	TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.5 DATED 26.6.2014.
EXHIBIT P4(a):	COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P4.
EXHIBIT P5:	TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 19.10.2015.
EXHIBIT P5(a):	COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5.
EXHIBIT P6:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.12.2014.
EXHIBIT P6(a):	COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6.
EXHIBIT P7:	COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

¶31

W.P.(C) No. 2715 of 2015

¶32

Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2015

¶33

J U D G M E N T

¶34

The petitioner is challenging the decision (Ext.P4) taken by the 1^st respondent dated 26.06.2014 not to issue tender schedule to the petitioner in the year 2014-2015.

¶35

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, it was submitted by both sides that Ext.P7 appeal is pending before the 3^rd respondent.

¶36

Therefore, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the additional 3^rd respondent to dispose of Ext.P7 appeal filed by the petitioner within a time frame.

¶37

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the additional 3^rd respondent to dispose of Ext.P7 appeal filed by the petitioner after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶38

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE

¶39

bka/-

¶40

Sd/-

Anas T.I v. the Changanacherry Muncipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anas T.I v. the Changanacherry Muncipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Livy T. Varghese Vs Devasia Thomas

Biju Vs Vinod

Alikutty Vs Akber

Vivek Anand Vs the Regional Transport Officer

Johny Joseph Vs M.G.University

Baselios Marthoma Mathews II Central School Vs Cbse