A.M.Mathai vs Kerala Water Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 12673 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
         TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 11649 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              A.M.MATHAI
0




              AGED 60 YEARS
              S/O MATHAI, ETTONNIL HOUSE, PAZHOOR PO, PIRAVOM
              ERNAKULAM - 686664.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.C.G.PREETHA
              SRI.JIJO JOSEPH



RESPONDENTS:

     1        KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
              JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.
              REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

     2        THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
              KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
              OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
              PH DIVISION, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 661.

              SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KWA


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                   SATHISH NINAN, J.
          ==================
              W. P. (C) No.11649 of 2021
          ==================
           Dated this the 1st day of June, 2021

                        JUDGMENT

Consequent on the lock down imposed on account

of the Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner could not

take part in the e-tender, the last date for

submission of which was dated 24.05.2021. The

petitioner had faced various hurdles including

inability to procure the necessary stamp papers,

preventing submission of tender within such short

period in the midst of lockdown, it is contended.

It is also stated that, when the 2nd respondent was

contacted, the petitioner was orally informed that

the date of tender will be extended in view of the

prevalent circumstances. However, without extending

the date, the tenders were opened on 26.05.2021.

There were only two bids and the rates quoted are

below the PAC specified in the notification.

Voicing his grievance, seeking cancellation of the

proceedings and to call for fresh tender, the

petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation W. P. (C) No.11649 of 2021

before the second respondent. The petitioner seeks

that the same may be looked into by him.

2. Since the tender has already been opened,

while considering any complaint regarding the

tender, the successful tender also needs to be

heard.

3. Accordingly it is ordered that, the second

respondent may pass orders on Ext.P4 representation

with due notice to and on hearing the petitioner

and also the successful tenderer. I make it clear

that I have not expressed anything on the merits of

the claim.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy// P.S. to Judge WP(C)11649/2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS:-

EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CARD ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE MANGALAM DAILY DATED 13.05.2021.

EXT.P3 PRINTOUT OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P4 PRINTOUT OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

-----