Allowed

Rafeeq K.K. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Dec 2020WP(C)/27528/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeking letter of indent for petroleum outlet approached the Court. The 4th respondent refused NOC citing non-compliance with IRC 12-2016 norms. The Court, relying on a precedent (Ext.P4), directed the 4th respondent to consider the application without insisting on those guidelines within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

The 4th respondent to consider the application for NOC without insisting on IRC/MORTH guidelines within 30 days.

Rafeeq K.K. Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

WP(C).No.27528 OF 2020(M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶7

WP(C).No.27528 OF 2020(M)

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

RAFEEQ K.K. AGED 41 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED, KOODATHAM KANDY HOUSE, AVADUKKA P.O, PERUVANNAMOOZHY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

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

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶13

2 KERALA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,

¶14

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

¶15

3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, KOZHIKODE-673 002

¶16

4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE DIST., COLLECTORTE, KOZHIKODE-673 020

¶17

5 HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. REP. BY ITS CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, KOZHIKODE RETAIL REGION, WEST HILL CHUNGAM, KOZHIKODE-673 005

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SMT.PRINCY XAVIER ,GP,SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR,SC

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No.27528 OF 2020(M)

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Dated this the 9th day of December 2020

¶25

The petitioner is offered a Letter of

¶26

Indent for conducting a petroleum outlet by the

¶27

5^th respondent and the 5^th respondent has submitted Ext.P2 application before the 4^th

¶28

respondent, requesting for NOC.

¶29

It is also stated by the petitioner

¶30

that the 3^rd respondent has forwarded Ext.P3

¶31

report, according to which IRC 12-2016 norms are not complied with and therefore NOC cannot be granted.

¶32

Petitioner relies on Ext.P4 judgment.

¶33

The petitioner has sought for a direction to the 4^th respondent to issue a No Objection Certificate without insisting norms in IRC 122016. The petitioner also pointed out that this

¶34

Court has in Ext.P4 judgment directed the

¶35

WP(C).No.27528 OF 2020(M)

¶36

District Collector in a similar case to consider the application for NOC without insisting on IRC/MORTH guidelines.

¶37

Therefore the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 4^th respondent to consider the application Ext.P2 in accordance with law without insisting IRC/MORTH guidelines within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶38

Sd/P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶39

¶40

WP(C).No.27528 OF 2020(M)

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONERS'S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXHIBIT	P1 COPY OF THE OFFER LETTER ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 30.05.2019.
EXHIBIT	P2 COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR GETTING NOC TO THE OUT LET AWARDED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 31.5.19.
EXHIBIT	P3 COPY OF REJECTION LETTER ISSUED BY THE PWD DATED 2.03.20.
EXHIBIT	P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 20454/2020.

¶45

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

Rafeeq K.K. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rafeeq K.K. 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

Raghavendra Nayak B. Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

P.v.Sebastian Vs the District Collector

E.a.Murali Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Rajesh Varkey Vs State of Kerala

Manu Bobby, Vs the District Magistrate and District Collector

Joseph Xavier Vs Triofab Constructions Pvt. Ltd.