SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 1696

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
SATHYABHAMA.M.K. – Appellant
Versus
SHEENA.M.B. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.LIJIN THAMBAN, SHRI.M.RETHEESHKUMAR
For the Respondents: SMT.M.B.SHYNI, SRI.P.NARAYANAN, SHRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SHRI.NICHOLAS JOSEPH, SHRI.K.JOHN MATHAI, SRI.DEEPAK RAJ, SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN, SRI.KURYAN THOMAS, SHRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition seeking a direction to the 4th respondent not to grant an NOC for the proposed petroleum retail outlet by the 1st respondent herein.

2. Sri.Jay Mohan, the learned counsel for the petroleum company would point out that an NOC has already been issued as evidenced by Ext.R1(a), as early as on 26.02.2017, even before the presentation of this writ petition.

3. Also heard the learned Government Pleader Sri.B.S.Syamanthak and Sri.A.Arunkumar, the learned counsel for the 6th respondent KSEB.

In view of the issuance of NOC as noticed earlier, I find no merit in this writ petition and the same would stand dismissed.

Sd/-

HARISANKAR V. MENON JUDGE ANA APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 17981 OF 2019 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top