Disposed

Thoppil Infra Associates v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Feb 2021WP(C)/1142/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of WP(C) No. 1142 of 2021 by directing the third respondent to consider the petitioner's request for refund of the security deposit after affording an opportunity of hearing to all stakeholders within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for deposit refund after hearing all stakeholders.

Thoppil Infra Associates Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶6

MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942

¶7

WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

THOPPIL INFRA ASSOCIATES REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NIZAMUDEEN A., THOPPIL BUILDING, THOLIKKUZHY, ADAYAMON P.O., KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 614.

¶10

BY ADV. SHRI.AJITH KRISHNAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

2 THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶14

3 ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶15

4 SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FOREST DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶16

5 CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 14.

¶17

6 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (CIVIL) DAM SAFETY AND DRIP, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 14.

¶18

7 DIRECTOR, MINING GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 4.

¶19

8 THE TRAVANCORE CEMENTS LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NATTAKAM, KOTTAYAM - 686 013.

¶20

WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)

¶21

¶22

OTHER PRESENT:

¶23

SPLGP.SRI.SANDESH RAJA.K, SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI,SC, SRI.SUDHEER CANESH KUMAR,SC,KSEB

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)

¶26

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

Dated this the 8^th day of February 2021

¶29

The petitioner claims that the 8^th respondent has awarded it the work of desiltation of Lower Periyar Reservoir, Idukki, based on which the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.3,57,50,000/- towards security deposit and an agreement was executed on 23.12.2015. It is stated that since respondents could not obtain clearance from the Forest Department/Central Government etc, the work could not be commenced. The petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P7 representation before the 3^rd respondent pointing out these aspects and requesting for refund of the amount to the petitioner pointing out the loss caused to him on account of execution of the agreement on awarding the work. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied with a direction to the 3^rd

¶30

respondent to consider the representation.

¶31

Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3^rd respondent to consider the request of the petitioner in Ext.P7 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, 8^th respondent and all other stake holders. Orders shall be passed within a period of six weeks. It is made clear that hearing can be held through electronic mode.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA

JUDGE

rkc

WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT	P1 TRUE COPY OF THE A EXECUTED BETWEEN RESPONDENT.	GREEMENT DATED 23/12/2015 THE PETITIONER AND 8TH
EXHIBIT	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE 8TH RESPONDENT T 23/12/2015.	WORK ORDER ISSUED BY THE O THE PETITIONER DATED
EXHIBIT	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE D PETITIONER IN FAVO FOR THE AMOUNT OF	EMAND DRAFT ISSUED BY THE UR OF THE 9TH RESPONDENT RS.3,07,50,000/-.
EXHIBIT	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE P DATED 4/6/2012 PR MINISTER.	ROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING ESIDED BY HON'BLE CHIEF
EXHIBIT	P5 TRUE COPY OF THE	SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENT
	DATED 21/12/2018 PETITIONER AND THE	EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 8TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P6 TRUE COPY OF THE IN W.P.(C) 20613/2	JUDGMENT DATED 14/9/2020 019.
EXHIBIT	P7 TRUE COPY OF THE BEFORE THE 3RD AN 21/12/2020.	REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED D 8TH RESPONDENTS DATED

Thoppil Infra Associates v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thoppil Infra Associates 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

He -Man Auto Robopark (P) Limited Vs Union of India

He-Man Auto Robopark (P) Limited Vs Union of India

He-Man Auto Robopark (P) Limited Vs Union of India

Saraswathy B. Vs S.S. Mallikarjuna Rao

Godvin Fernandaz Vs Union Bank of India

Jini Sebastian, Vs the District Level Authorisation Committee