Disposed

M/S. Unicore (India) Limited v. Kerala Medical Services Corporation Limited

Kerala HC2 Nov 2017WP(C)/35020/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's stay petition within three months and stayed the impugned order until then, clarifying the stay prevents supply of materials or contract applications.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to consider the stay petition within three months; stay on the impugned order until then.

M/S. Unicore (India) Limited Vs Kerala Medical… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/ 11TH KARTHIKA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 35020 of 2017 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

M/S. UNICORE (INDIA) LIMITED AN ISO 9000-2008 CERTIFIED COPMANY, C-22 & 23, SECTOR-3, NOIDA-201 301 (UTTAR PRADESH) REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ABDUL MATEEN

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.) SRI.SREEDHAR RAVINDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

1. KERALA MEDICAL SERVICES CORPORATION LIMITED THYCAUD P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 014 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶11

2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001

¶12

R1 BY SRI. M.AJAY, SC,

¶13

R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 35020 of 2017 (B)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶20

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FOR INTENT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 24-9-14 EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE DRUGS INSPECTOR ZONE II ERNAKULAM DATED 20-01-16 EXHIBIT P2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF TEST OF THE GOVERNMENT ANALYST DTD 3-12-15 EXHIBIT P2(B): TRUE COPY OF THE LABORATORY PROTOCOL REPOT DTD 1-12-15

¶21

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE TEST REPORT OF THE GOVERNMENT ANALYST DATED 20-4-15 EXHIBIT P3(A): TRUE COPY OF THE LABORATORY PROTOCOL DATED 20-04-2015

¶22

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DRUGS INSPECTOR ZONE-II EKM DATED 16-02-16

¶23

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE DRUGS INSPECTOR ZONE III THRISSUR DATED 01-04-2016 EXHIBIT P5(A): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF TEST OF THE GOVERNMENT ANALYST DTD 5-3-16 EXHIBIT P5(B): TRUE COPY OF THE LABORATORY PROTOCOL REPORT DATED 5-3-16 EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DRUGS INSPECTOR ZONE -III THRISSUR DATED 2-5-2016 EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 2-6-16 EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18-6-16 EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD 18-7-16

¶24

WP(C).No. 35020 of 2017 (B)

¶25

EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22-07-16 EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27-7-2016 EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 09-09-2016 IN WPC NO.30415/2016 EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08-06-2017 EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 07-07-2017 IN WPC NO.30415/16 AND 21351/2017 EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03-10-2017 EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 23-10-2017 EXHIBIT P17: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 23-10-2017 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

¶30

W.P.(C)No.35020 of 2017

¶31

Dated this the 2^nd day of November, 2017

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

The petitioner filed Ext.P16 appeal with Ext.P17 stay petition, before the 2^nd respondent; which are pending consideration. Ext.P15 order is challenged in Ext.P16 appeal. The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration of Ext.P16 appeal and Ext.P17 stay petition filed before the 2^nd respondent.

¶34

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P17 stay petition within a time frame.

¶35

In the result, the 2^nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P17 stay petition within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till then there shall be a stay of Ext.P15 order. The stay order passed will not entitle the petitioner to either supply materials to the respondent or applying for any contracts notified by the respondent.

¶36

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶37

Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶38

skj

M/S. Unicore (India) Limited v. Kerala Medical Services Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Unicore (India) Limited v. Kerala Medical Services Corporation Limited

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

Preetha S. Vs Somanathan Nair

Smt.Sreelatha Vs the District Collector, Collectorate, Pathanamthitta District

Sukumaran.M.K Vs State of Kerala

Shajahan Vattiparambath Vs State of Kerala

Paulose M.O. Vs Office of the Deputy Thahasildar (Rr), Thrissur

Jithu S. Vs Assistant Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education