Dismissed

State of Kerala v. Alliance Grain Products Pvt. Ltd.

Kerala HC12 Jul 2018RP/884/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a review petition arguing that a notification transferring jurisdiction negated a previous liberty granted to the Government to reconsider an appeal. The Court held that the Government's discretion to ignore the liberty is absolute, rendering no review necessary.

What did the court decide?

Review petition dismissed; no reasons recorded for review order. Clarified liberty under previous judgment stands but Government may elect not to exercise it.

State of Kerala Vs Alliance Grain Products Pvt. Ltd. — Kerala HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

R.P.No. 884 of 2017

¶6

(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 30/2009 DATED 20-03-2017)

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶9

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES,

¶10

GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001

¶11

2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶12

COLLECTORATE , KOLLAM

¶13

3 DEPUTY CONTROLLER OF RATIONING (SOUTH ZONE), CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICE, KOLLAM.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.R. DHANIL

¶15

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶16

ALLIANCE GRAIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. PALATHARA, THATTAMALA, KOLLAM-20, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, AMEENUDDIN.

¶17

BY SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT. INDU SUSAN JACOB

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

mks

¶20

R.P NO. 884 OF 2017

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

REVIEW PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶23

ANNEXURE-A1-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. 9324/D1/2010/F&SCD DATED 26/07/2010

¶24

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES

¶25

NIL

¶26

/TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE

¶27

mks 23/07/2018

¶28

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.

¶29

...........................................

¶30

R.P.No. 884 of 2017

¶31

.......................................

¶32

Dated this the 12^th day of July, 2018

¶33

ORDER

¶34

I have heard this review petition quite in detail today and the learned Government Pleader advanced submissions as to why my judgment, dated 20.03.2017, requires to be reviewed, as prayed for herein.

¶35

I notice that the only contention of the petitioner is that even though in the judgment in question I have granted liberty to the competent Secretary of the Government to reconsider the appeal of the petitioner, it cannot be done because, as per a notification dated 26.07.2010, the powers under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, have been transferred to the District and Sessions Judge of the concerned area. The learned Government Pleader says that the directions in the judgment to the Secretary of the Government to reconsider the appeal, therefore, becomes untenable in law.

¶36

Though I hear the learned Government Pleader as

¶37

R.P.No. 884 of 2017

¶38

¶39

above, the fact remains that in paragraph 10 of the judgment I had quashed Ext.P13, which is an order issued by the Government in an appeal filed by the petitioner, and had granted liberty to the Government to re-consider the appeal, if they choose to do so. Therefore, what was reserved in my judgment is only a liberty to the Government and therefore, if the Government feels that they are not competent to reconsider the matter, it is upto them to decide not to do so and to leave the matter there.

¶40

In such view, I see no reason to review my judgment, dated 20.03.2017 , however, clarifying that if the Government feels any further action is required to be taken pursuant to the judgment, they are free to do so in terms of law, including by invoking the jurisdiction of the District Court under the aforementioned notification.

¶41

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶42

AMV/16/07/2018

State of Kerala v. Alliance Grain Products Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Alliance Grain Products Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.P.Joseph Vs P.H.Kurien

Kerala State Film Development & Corporation Ltd. Vs Kerala State Public Service Commission

Rajan K. Vs the Chairman (Lic)

Dr.Munshid N.T. Vs State of Kerala

Pankajakshan P.P. Vs Devassia P.J.

Arifa Beevi Vs Kondotty Grama Panchayath