Remanded

Joshy Varghese v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Oct 2019RP/12/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a review petition filed to seek reconsideration of a prayer for refund of a performance guarantee amount that was overlooked in the original writ judgment, choosing to leave that specific prayer open for future proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The second prayer raised in the writ petition for refund of performance guarantee amount is left open to be considered in appropriate proceedings.

Joshy Varghese Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2019) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 22ND ASWINA, 1941

¶5

RP.No.12 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 36084/2018

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 36084/2018(I) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA 17.12.2018

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER:

¶8

JOSHY VARGHESE, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.VAREETH, THELAKKADAN HOUSE, MALAMURI, PULLUVAZHY.P.O., RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, MOB-8547521980.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR)

¶10

SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM

¶11

SRI.N.RAJESH

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶14

2 CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION, PUBLIC OFFICE, NEAR MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.

¶15

3 SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION CENTRAL CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD-682030.

¶16

4 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, THRISSUR-680020.

¶17

5 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION, THRISSUR-680020.

¶18

6 ASSISTANT ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION SECTION, CHERPU, THRISSUR-680561.

¶19

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RON BASTIAN

¶20

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

RP.No.12 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 36084/2018

¶22

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Dated this the 14^th day of October, 2019

¶25

This review petition is filed seeking review of the judgment

¶26

to the extent the prayer No.2 made in the writ petition had not been considered by this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext. P16 representation preferred by the petitioner was with regard to the revised estimate and that the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P13 communication. It is submitted that in the circumstances, the second prayer raised by the petitioner for refund of performance guarantee amount deposited by the petitioner with the 3^rd respondent had not been considered by this Court.

¶27

The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits

¶28

that the performance guarantee amount cannot be disbursed at this point of time in view of the rectification works which are

¶29

RP.No.12 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 36084/2018

¶30

¶31

required to be done by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the review petitioner disputes the said contention.

¶32

In any view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the direction in the judgment was only for consideration of Ext.P13 communication issued by the 3^rd respondent to the second respondent which was with regard to the revised estimate and revised bill.

¶33

In the above view of the matter, the second prayer raised by the petitioner in the writ petition is left open to be considered in appropriate proceedings.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

kmd

RP.No.12 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 36084/2018

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX

¶41

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶42

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 36084/2018 DATED 17-12-2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Joshy Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joshy Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Ravi Vs State of Kerala

Siddique K.M Vs Eriyad Grama Panchayath

Shaji.P Vs Kozhikode Corporation

Viji Williams Vs Aneesh P.B.

Marutham Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Kerala

V.Jayanathan Vs the General Manager(Authorised OFFIECR)1