Disposed

K.B.Ashraf v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Oct 2021WP(C)/14144/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted a direction to the respondent Panchayat to consider a pending application (Ex.P13) from the petitioner within three weeks, ensuring an opportunity of hearing is provided before passing any final order.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P13 application within three weeks before passing orders, after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

K.B.Ashraf Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 12TH ASWINA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 14144 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

K.B.ASHRAF AGED 61 YEARS S/O. BAVUNNI, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, THACHAVALLATH HOUSE, ELOOKKARA, MUPPATHADAM P. O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683110.

¶8

BY ADV K.V.RASHMI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2 PARAKKADAVU BLOCK PANCHAYAT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KURUMASSERY P. O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683579. 3 THE SECRETARY PARAKKADAVU BLOCK PANCHAYAT, KURUMASSERY P. O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683579. 4 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SUB DIVISION, PARAKKADAVU BLOCK PANCHAYAT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683579. 5 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SUB DIVISION, PARAKKADAVU BLOCK PANCHAYAT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683579. BY ADV I.V.PRAMOD ADV.SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SENIOR GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO.14144/2021

¶13

¶14

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J

¶15

W.P.(C)No.14144 of 2021

¶16

Dated this the 04^th day of October 2021

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The above writ petition is filed with

¶19

following prayers:

¶20

“i) A writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for Ext.P11 and records culminating to the same and quash the same as the same is illegal, arbitrary and violative of natural justice .

¶21

ii) A writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for Ext.P12 and all records leading to the same and quash the same, considering it as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice.

¶22

iii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P13 pending before them, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶23

iv) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No.3 to release the EMD of Rs.1,05,000/- forth with as the project is retendered and the same was initially stopped without the fault of the petitioner.

¶24

v) A writ of mandamus or any other

¶25

WP(C) NO.14144/2021

¶26

¶27

appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No.3 to release the 10% of bill amount retained by them as is evident from Ext.P12, forthwith.

¶28

vi) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No.3 to issue a project closure statement, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶29

vii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No.3 to award a nominal interest of 18% per annum for every day's illegal delay caused in disbursing the amounts covered in Ext.P14 request.

¶30

viii) To grant such other reliefs sought from time to time including the cost of this proceeding.”

¶31

2. Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner argued in detail for some time, the counsel submitted that she will be satisfied, if a direction is issued to the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P13 application.

¶32

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing counsel for the Panchayath.

¶33

4. After hearing both sides, I think there

¶34

can be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to

¶35

consider Ext.P13 application after giving an

¶36

¶37

WP(C) NO.14144/2021

¶38

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a time frame.

¶39

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in

¶40

the following manner:

¶41

i) The 3^rd respondent will consider

¶42

Ext.P13 application and pass appropriate orders in it, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a

¶43

copy of this judgment.

¶44

ii) Before passing final order, the 3^rd respondent will give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶45

iii) The petitioner will produce a copy of this writ petition along with the judgment before the 3^rd respondent for compliance.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

WP(C) NO.14144/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14144/2021

¶52

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶53

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 08.08.2016.
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE WORK ORDER NO.122/2014/E DATED 04.08.2016 ISSUED
	BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT NO.02/2016-17 DATED 25.08.2016 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.E-122/14 DATED 09.02.2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
	15.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 24.09.2018 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.11.2018 BEARING NO.122/2014/E ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 04.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.32801/2018 DATED 08.04.2019.
EXHIBIT P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE TIME EXTENSION APPLICATION DATED 18.03.2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P11	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING

¶54

WP(C) NO.14144/2021

¶55

¶56

NO.122/2014/E DATED 12.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶57

EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.09.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.06.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶58

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

¶59

//TRUE COPY//

¶60

PA TO JUDGE

K.B.Ashraf v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.B.Ashraf 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

Binu Mathew Vs Kerala Water Authority

Suresh Mathew Vs Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

Haneefa Vs Kerala State Women'S Development Corpo

Dr. Reema Thomas Kochupurakal Vs State of Kerala

Johnson Peter Vs State of Kerala and Others

Muhammed Shameer, Vs Station House Officer