Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 7250 Ker
Judgement Date : 2 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1942
RP.No.684 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 16437/2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.06.2019 IN WP(C) 16437/2019(D) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
KHEMKA FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD.,
REGISTERED OFFICE AT 6/1183, KUNHIPARI BUILDING,
CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 032, REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR, N.K. KHALID.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
HEAD OFFICE, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR,
KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-PIN-682 020.
2 THE MANAGER,
KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION,
HEAD OFFICE, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA,
KOCHI-PIN-682 020.
3 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL
SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN-695 001.
R.P. No. 684/2019 :2:
in W.P.(C) No. 16437/2019
4 ADDL.R4. IMPLEADED:
ASSISTANT AGRICULTURAL MARKETING ADVISOR,
DIRECTORATE OF MARKETING AND INSPECTION, MINISTRY OF
AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
REGIONAL OFFICE AT 6TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM - 682 030.
[ADDITIONAL R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE ORDER DATED
07/11/2019 IN IA.NO.2/2019 IN RP.684/2019.]
R1 & R2 BY SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, SC, SUPPLYCO.
R3 - SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R4 - SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASGI
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No. 684/2019 :3:
in W.P.(C) No. 16437/2019
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2021.
ORDER
This Review Petition is filed seeking to review the judgment
dated 17.06.2019 in W.P.(C) No. 16437 of 2019.
2. The subject issue relates to a tender invited by the Kerala
State Civil Supplies Corporation and in which after the notice inviting
tender, an additional condition was imposed.
3. Even though various contentions are raised in the Review
Petition in regard to the agmark provided to the contractors, who are
the respondents in the writ petition, the learned counsel for the Review
Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the Review Petition.
Accordingly, this Review Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv
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!