Allowed

Nasira Mol v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jun 2020WA/674/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment which dismissed the underlying writ petition. This decision aligns the case with a recent batch judgment (W.A. No. 27 of 2020) that had set aside similar orders, granting interim No Objection Certificates to the litigants.

What did the court decide?

Settled aside the impugned judgment and allowed the writ appeal, granting benefits of the interim No Objection Certificates.

Nasira Mol Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1942

¶7

WA.No.674 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.12.2019 IN WP(C) 29195/2019(Y) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶10

NASIRA MOL, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.NAZER, ONGALLOOR VEEDU, NALUKANDAM, EDATHANATTUKARA, PALAKKAD

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL

¶12

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY KERALA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,

¶14

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶15

2 KERALA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REP BY THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT JAGAD BUILDINGS, KOWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003.

¶16

3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD ROADS DIVISION, PALAKKAD-678 001.

¶17

4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD DIST, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD-678 013.

¶18

5 INDIA OIL CORPORATION LTD REP BY ITS CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, COCHIN DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR.P.O, KOCHI-682 036.

¶19

SR GP SRI.K.V.MANOJ KUMAR FOR R1 TO R4, SRI. M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR FOR R5 SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

W.A. No. 674 OF 2020

¶22

-2-

¶23

Dated this the 11^th day of June, 2020.

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

S. Manikumar, CJ

¶26

Instant writ appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 19.12.2019 in W.P.(C) No. 29195 of 2019, by which the writ court dismissed the writ petition holding that if at all the petitioners have any grievance against the application of IRC Guidelines and MORTH Norms in the matter of considering their requests for No Objection Certificates under Rules 144 of the Rules, they cannot approach this Court before a decision is taken on the application.

¶27

The very same issue has been considered by this Court in W.A. No. 27 of 2020 and connected cases, and this Court as per judgment dated 05.03.2020 allowed the writ appeals. The operative portion of the said judgment reads thus:

¶28

“7. Mr. M. GopiKrishnan Nambiar, learned standing counsel for Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Mr. N. Manoj Kumamr, learned Special Government Pleader for the State submitted that Government have incorporated IRC norms in the PWD Manual. G.O.(M.S) No.16/2020/PWD dated 10.2.2020 has been issued subsequent to the

¶29

W.A. No. 674 OF 2020

¶30

-3-

¶31

disposal of writ petitions. IRC guidelines for road safety has been withdrawn on 1.12.2019. Had the of withdrawal of IRC guidelines been brought to the notice of the writ court, this common judgment dismissing the writ petitions for not satisfying IRC guidelines would not have been passed

¶32

Pursuant to the interim directions granted in the writ petitions, some of the appellants have been issued with No Objection Certificates. Subsequently, writ petitions have been dismissed. Though interim order merges with the final judgment, correctness of the said judgment is carried on in the instant appeals and judgment is reversed, the litigant is entitled to be protected and entitled to the benefits arising out of the interim order. Thus, we are of the view that the writ petitioners/appellants, who have obtained No Objection Certificate from competent authority shall continue with the the benefits of the interim order. We are not expressing anything on those applications which are rejected or still pending with the competent authority. Common judgment in W.P(C). No.29005 of 2019 and connected cases dated 19.12.2019 is set aside. All the writ appeals are allowed, as indicated above.”

¶33

3. Since the issue is already covered in favour of the appellant, Sri. Surin George Ipe, Sr. Government Pleader, is put on notice for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri. M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar, learned Standing Counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation is also put on notice for the 5^th respondent.

¶34

W.A. No. 674 OF 2020

¶35

-4-

¶36

Following the judgment dated 05.03.2020 passed by this

¶37

Court in W.A.No. 27 of 2020 and batch, we allow this writ appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment.

¶38

sd/-

¶39

S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.

¶40

sd/-

¶41

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

¶42

Nasira Mol v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasira Mol v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.S.M.Musthafa Vs State of Kerala

Sadakathulla M.K Vs the Union Territory of Lakshadweep

K.Premanandan Vs State of Kerala

Govindan Palikappil Vs Union of India

The Kerala High Court Advocates Association, Vs the State of Kerala

Jossey Mathew Vs State of Kerala