Disposed

U.B.Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Mar 2019WP(C)/12756/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition seeking mandamus for constructing a retaining wall. The court accepted counsel's submission that the MP fund had elapsed, closed the petition, and granted liberty to approach the appropriate authority later.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed; liberty granted to petitioner to approach appropriate authority at a later stage.

U.B.Manikandan Vs State of Kerala — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 12756 of 2014

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

U.B.MANIKANDAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.BAHULAYAN, UNNIYERAM PURAKKAL HOUSE, P.O.NATTIKA BEACH, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001

¶11

2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR, COLLECTORATE AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680003

¶12

3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680003

¶13

4 BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, THALIKULAM BLOCK PANCHAYAT, THRISSUR - 680569

¶14

5 NATTIKA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

¶15

VALAPPAD P.O., TRIPRAYAR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 680567

¶16

6 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT SUB DIVISION, THALIKULAM, NATTIKA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THRISSUR - 680569

¶17

7 T.K.PRASAD, MEMBER (WARD NO.II), NATTIKA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680566

¶18

R1 - SMT. RAJI T. BHASKER, GP. R5 - SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY R7 - SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL SMT.R.RAJITHA SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN

¶19

WP(C).No. 12756 of 2014

¶20

¶21

SRI.K.D.SREEVISAKH SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C).No. 12756 of 2014

¶24

3 JUDGMENT

¶25

The writ petition is filed seeking the issue of a

¶26

writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 6 to

¶27

construct the retaining wall on both sides of Kundarappa thodu which is situated in Ward No.II of Nattika Grama

¶28

Panchayat. The construction in question was being carried out by utilising the MP funds.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

¶30

that the fund has already elapsed and the grievance raised in the writ petition does not subsist as of now.

¶31

In view of the aforementioned submission, the writ petition is closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievance, if required at a later stage,

¶32

before appropriate authority.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

SPR

WP(C).No. 12756 of 2014

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶41

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL THAT IS SANCTIONED FROM THE MP FUND AND SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE THODU AND THE ATTEMPTED CONSTRUCTION BY THE RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 7.5.2014.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 30.4.2014.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 14.5.2014.

¶42

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL.

U.B.Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

U.B.Manikandan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anandavally Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Rajeev Vs Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions

Manager Vs State of Kerala

Zeenath Bee Federic Mari Vs Mr. Prince

Vadakara Merchants Association Vs State of Kerala

Pushpaleela Vs State of Kerala