High CourtsDivision Bench

A.G. Ravindran vs Cochin Devaswom, Special Devaswom Commissioner and Thiruvananthapuram Group Assistant

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 18 November 2010 · Citation: (2010) 11 KL CK 0253

HON’BLE JUDGES
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J · P. Bhavadasan, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) . No. 34576 of 2010 (V)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

1 paragraphs · 195 words

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—The Petitioner was the successful bidder for different preceding years, even continuously, for the contract in relation to ''Vedi Vazhipadu'' for Sree Kurumba Bhagavathi Temple in Kodungallur. He has come to this Court now because the Devaswom Board insists on production of explosives licence at the time of auction. In fact, he stands by Ext.P3 judgment issued by this Court during the previous years. All that is required is that if the operator, following the successful auction, needs to hold any particular licence, he should have it. This is all that is meant by saying that if he has a short fire licence, he can carry out the operation as stated in Ext.P3. Learned Senior Government Pleader says that the ADM has instructed that in so far as the Kodungallur temple is concerned, the CDB has licence for the storage of explosives. Therefore, the Petitioner can be permitted to participate in the auction and if he becomes the successful tenderer, he will be granted the work on production of such licence as may be required for an operator in terms of the law relating to explosives. The writ petition is ordered accordingly.