Kerala High Court
Central Engineering Company vs The Director Of Civil Supplies on 4 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/14TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.18776 OF 2020(V)
PETITIONER:
CENTRAL ENGINEERING COMPANY,
XV/221A, CHITTISSERY P.O.,
THRISSUR,
KERALA-670301,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
GESO GEORGE N.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH)
SRI.ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL SUPPLIES,
PUBLIC OFFICE, OPP. MUSEUM VIKAS BHAVAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
2 KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION
LIMITED (SUPPLYCO),
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHINAGAR,
KOCHI-682020.
3 KERALA STATE SEED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(KSSDA),
REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER
(JOINT DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE),
CHEMBUKKAVU,
THRISSUR-680020.
4 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
WP(C) No.18776/2020
:2 :
5 MR. C.J. FRANCIS,
RESIDING AT CHEMMANNOR HOUSE,
SKV COLLEGE ROAD, P.O. KANATTUKARA,
THRISSUR-680011.
R2 BY SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO
R5 BY SRI.EDISON THOMAS
R5 BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM
R1-4 BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 04.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.18776/2020
:3 :
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 4th day of January, 2021
The allegation of the petitioner is that the 5th
respondent is disqualified for participating in tenders floated
by the 2nd and 3rd respondents. The petitioner on such
allegation seeks the following reliefs:-
"(i) Declare that 5th respondent participating
in the tender process invited by the Kerala State Seed
Development Authority (KSSDA) as per Ext.P1 notice
dated 18.06.2020 for transportation of Paddy seeds
without disclosing material information is illegal.
(ii) Declare that 5th respondent participating
in the tender process initiated by Supplyco by Ext.P2
notice for transportation and handling of food grains
and ration articles, either directly or through name-
name lenders (Benamies) by forming business cartel
is illegal.
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other
writ or order directing respondents 1, 2 and 3 to take
appropriate action to prevent the participation of 5th
respondent in the tender process initiated by Exts.P1
and P2 tender notices, either directly or through
name-name lenders (Benamies) by forming business
cartel and award of contract to 5th respondent or his
Benamies.
(iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other
writ or order directing the 3rd respondent to proceed
with the tender process initiated as per Ext.P1 notice
after excluding the 5th respondent."
WP(C) No.18776/2020
2. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions,
submitted that Ext.P1 tender has been cancelled and Ext.P6
tender was floated thereafter. As far as Ext.P6 tender is
concerned, the 5th respondent is not disqualified and after
considering all bids, tender has already been awarded to the
5th respondent. The award of tender to the 5th respondent is
not under challenge in this writ petition and therefore, this writ
petition has become infructuous to that extent.
3. Learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent
would submit that the 5th respondent has not participated in
the tenders pursuant to Ext.P2 notification. Therefore, no
relief against the 5th respondent can be granted as far as
tenders invited pursuant to Ext.P2 is concerned.
4. Learned counsel for the 5th respondent would
submit that his disqualification is no more subsisting and he is
entitled to participate in all the tenders floated by the 2 nd and
3rd respondents.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Government Pleader, learned Standing Counsel
WP(C) No.18776/2020
appearing for the 2nd respondent and learned counsel
appearing for the 5th respondent.
6. In view of the fact that the 5th respondent has not
participated in tenders pursuant to Ext.P2 notification of the
2nd respondent, no relief is liable to be granted to the petitioner
in that regard. As far as Ext.P6 tender floated by the 3rd
respondent is concerned, now that since the tender has
already been awarded to the 5th respondent, the petitioner
may have to challenge the said award, if he is so advised.
In the circumstances, nothing survives in this writ
petition to be adjudicated. Therefore, the writ petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/04.01.2021
WP(C) No.18776/2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE DATED
18/06/2020 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE
SEED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (KSSDA).
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE DATED
16/07/2020 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER,
KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES
CORPORATION LIMITED (SUPPLYCO).
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
MANAGING DIRECTOR OF KERALA STATE
CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION DATED
02/05/2019.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 17/08/2020 BEFORE THE
JOINT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
(EXECUTIVE OFFICER), KERALA STATE SEED
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (KSSDA).
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
17/08/2020 BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF
CIVIL SUPPLIES.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE NO
A(2)722/2020 DATED 24.7.2020 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION
CONFIRMATION OF THE PETITIONER FIRM
DATED 17.9.2020 IN THE E TENDERING
SYSTEM GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE BID SUBMISSION
CONFIRMATION OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
DATED 17.9.2020 IN THE E-TENDERING
SYSTEM GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
WP(C) No.18776/2020
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER SUBMISSION
REPORT DATED 17.9.2020 WITH RESPECT TO
TENDER NO A2-722/2020 IN THE E
TENDERING SYSTEM GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE TENDER
COMMITTEE DATED 14.8.2020
