Travancore Devaswom Board v. Arunkumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH 2015/12TH PHALGUNA, 1936 RP.No. 235 of 2015 IN WP(C).33488/2014 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 33488/2014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 23-12-2014 REVIEW PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT:
-------------------------------------------------------- TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASW RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 6 & 7:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ARUNKUMAR, VALIYAPUTHUSSERIL VADAKKATHIL KADAKKAD NORTH, PANDALAM, PIN 689501
2. DIRECTOR, LOCAL FUND AUDITS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695 001
3. ANISH T.V.
THANNIMOOTTIL THRIKKODITHANAM P.O., CHANGANASSERY-686 105 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.RENJITH R BY SRI.K.SASIKUMAR R(3RD PARTY) BY SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH R BY SRI.V.K.SUNIL THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.N.RAVINDRAN & A.HARIPRASAD, JJ.
--------------------------- R.P. No.235 of 2015 IN W.P.(C) No.33488 of 2014 -------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2015
O R D E R
P.N.Ravindran, J.
This is a petition seeking a review of the interim order passed by us on 23.12.2014 in W.P.(C) No.33488 of 2014 contending that before the right to operate and run toilets in the new block was awarded to the third respondent herein (the 7th respondent in W.P.(C) No.33488 of 2014) wide publicity was given through the public address system and by publishing the notice in the locality. It is contended that the writ petitioner did not at any point of time submit a quotation and therefore, he cannot contend that the award of the contract to the third respondent (the 7th respondent in W.P.(C) No.33488 of 2014) is in any way vitiated.
2. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the interim order sought to be reviewed, the right to run the toilets in the new block was awarded to the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.33488 of 2014 and later, by order passed by another Division Bench of this Court on 6.1.2015 the right to run the toilets in B block was awarded to the 7th respondent in
the writ petition. That apart, we have by order passed on 23.2.2015 in R.P.No.205 of 2015 reviewed and recalled the observations against the Executive Engineer of the Board. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion that no further orders are called for in this review petition. It is accordingly closed.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) A.HARIPRASAD, (JUDGE) vps