Disposed

Mohammed Ali v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Dec 2021WP(C)/19506/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-line order in a writ petition regarding a cancelled works contract. The court discharged the petition by directing the 2nd respondent to expeditiously consider the petitioner's representation and afford an opportunity of hearing before passing a final order.

What did the court decide?

Directed 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P18 representation within one month and to afford opportunity of hearing before passing final order.

Mohammed Ali Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | 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 13^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 19506 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MOHAMMED ALI PULLIYIL MADASSERI HOUSE, MELMURI P.O., MALAPPURAM-676 517 BY ADVS. P.SHANES METHAR N.KRISHNA PRASAD

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PORTS & FISHERIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005 2 THE CHIEF ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, KAMALESWARAM, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 009 3 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT (NORTH CIRCLE), PUTHIYANIRATHU, ELATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 303 BY ADV.SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

WP(C) NO.19506/2021

¶12

¶13

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J

¶14

W.P.(C)No.19506 of 2021

¶15

Dated this the 13^th day of December,2021

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The above writ petition is filed with

¶18

following prayers:

¶19

“i) To issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to the issuance of Ext.P14, examine its propriety and legality and to quash the same to the extent it denies the benefit of rate revision;

¶20

ii) In the alternative, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that in the event of the request for revision being declined, direct the respondents to foreclose the contract relating to the subject work without imposing any consequences on the petitioner

¶21

iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to release the amount covered by Ext.P16 bill forthwith.

¶22

iv) To direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner in furtherance of Ext.P15.

¶23

v) To grant such other reliefs as may

¶24

WP(C) NO.19506/2021

¶25

¶26

be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶27

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contract itself

¶28

is now cancelled at the risk and cost of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he submitted Ext.P18 representation before the 2^nd respondent, narrating his grievance. The counsel submitted that, let there be a direction to consider Ext.P18 representation.

¶29

3. In such circumstances, I think this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P18 and to pass appropriate orders in it, in accordance to law.

¶30

Therefore this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

¶31

(i) The 2^nd respondent is directed to

¶32

consider Ext.P18 representation as

¶33

WP(C) NO.19506/2021

¶34

¶35

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy

¶36

of this judgment.

¶37

(ii) Before passing final order, the 2^nd respondent will give an opportunity of

¶38

hearing to the petitioner.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

WP(C) NO.19506/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE	COPY	OF THE RELEVANT PAGES	OF
	THE W /79/2	ORKS 018-2	AGREEMENT NO.H.E.D. (N. 019 DATED 04.01.2019	C.)
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE	COPY	OF THE LETTER DA	TED
	07.03 PETIT	.2019 IONER	SUBMITTED BY	THE
EXHIBIT P2A	TRUE	COPY	OF THE LETTER DA	TED
	15.06 PETIT	.2019 IONER	SUBMITTED BY	THE
EXHIBIT P2B	TRUE	COPY	OF THE LETTER DA	TED
	02.08 PETIT	.2019 IONER	SUBMITTED BY	THE
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE	COP	Y OF THE APPLICAT	ION
	SUBMI 21.03	TTED .2020	BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING EXTENSION OF T	ON IME
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE 3RD R	COPY ESPON	OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF DENT	THE
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE	COPY	OF THE APPLICATION	FOR
	EXTEN SUBMI	SION TTED	OF TIME DATED 21.01.2 BY THE PETITIONER	021
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE	COP	Y OF THE PROCEEDI	NGS
	EXTEN TO 30	DING .04.2	THE TIME OF COMPLETION 021	UP
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE EXTEN PETIT	COPY SION IONER	OF THE APPLICATION OF TIME SUBMITTED BY	FOR THE
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE	COPY	OF THE RECOMMENDATION	OF
	ASSIS TIME	TANT	ENGINEER FOR EXTENSION	OF
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE	COPY	OF THE RECOMMENDATION	OF
	ASSIS	TANT	EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DA	TED

WP(C) NO.19506/2021

30.07.2021

EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DATED 02.08.2021
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
	DATED 18.08.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
	DATED 18.08.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT DATED 31.8.2021
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF ORDER GRANTING
	EXTENSION OF TIME DATED 11.08.2021 HOLDS THE FIELD
EXHIBIT P15	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
	27.8.2021 FROM THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P16	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
	23.6.2021 OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DIVISION, KOZHIKODE
EXHIBIT P17	TRUE COPY OF BANK GUARANTEE FOR AN AMOUNT OF BANK GUARANTEE
EXHIBIT P18	TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE TERMS OF THE TENDER
EXHIBIT P19	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 1/10/2021

¶51

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

PA TO JUDGE

Mohammed Ali v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Ali 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

N.K.Paulose Kutty Vs the Reserve Bank of India

M/S. Galaxy Homes Private Limited, Vs State of Kerala

Veekay Tea Company Private Ltd. Vs Union of India

Gcvd Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Vs Union of India

Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithi Vs State of Kerala

Vysian Hamza Vs Divisional Forest Officer