Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 4545 Ker
Judgement Date : 8 February, 2021
WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)
PETITIONER/S:
THOPPIL INFRA ASSOCIATES
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NIZAMUDEEN
A., THOPPIL BUILDING, THOLIKKUZHY, ADAYAMON P.O.,
KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 614.
BY ADV. SHRI.AJITH KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY
INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4 SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
FOREST DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
5 CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 14.
6 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (CIVIL)
DAM SAFETY AND DRIP, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY
BOARD, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 14.
7 DIRECTOR, MINING GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 4.
8 THE TRAVANCORE CEMENTS LTD.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NATTAKAM,
KOTTAYAM - 686 013.
WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)
2
OTHER PRESENT:
SPLGP.SRI.SANDESH RAJA.K,
SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI,SC,
SRI.SUDHEER CANESH KUMAR,SC,KSEB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 8th day of February 2021
The petitioner claims that the 8th 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 3rd
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 3rd
respondent to consider the representation.
Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a
direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the request of the
petitioner in Ext.P7 after affording an opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner, 8th 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
rkc JUDGE
WP(C).No.1142 OF 2021(P)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 23/12/2015
EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 8TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WORK ORDER ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 23/12/2015.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF THE 9TH RESPONDENT FOR THE AMOUNT OF RS.3,07,50,000/-.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING DATED 4/6/2012 PRESIDED BY HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENT DATED 21/12/2018 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 8TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/9/2020 IN W.P.(C) 20613/2019.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD AND 8TH RESPONDENTS DATED 21/12/2020.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!