Renjulal S vs The Registrar
2021 Latest Caselaw 23100 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY,THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 20101 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

         RENJULAL S
         AGED 48 YEARS
         S/O SUKESAN.K., ANIZHAM, ADUVALLY, MYLAKKARA
         P.O., KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 572

         BY ADV R.GOPAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE REGISTRAR
         UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, PALAYAM,
         THIRUVANANTHPAURAM-695 581
    2    THE UNIVERSITY ENGINEER,
         OFFICE OF THE UNIVERSITY ENGINEER, KERALA
         UNIVERSITY, UNIVERSITY CENTRE, KARIYAVATTOM P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 581
    3    JAYARAJ.N.J.,
         T.C.18/100-2, SAPHALYAM, THIRUMALA P.O,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 006
    4    ADDL.R4.SRI.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI.B
         BHASKARA VILASAM, VELAMANOOR PO
         PALLICKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 604

         (ADDL. R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.
         24.11.2021 IN IA.1/2021)

         BY ADV SHRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, UNIVERSITY OF
         KERALA

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP     FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.11.2021,      THE COURT ON THE SAME      DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.20101/2021
                                :2 :




                        JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 24th day of November, 2021

The petitioner, who is a B-Class PWD Contractor,

has approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P7 to the

extent of rejecting Ext.P3 Experience Certificate submitted by

the petitioner. The petitioner also seeks to quash Ext.P8 and

to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of Ext.P9 representation

and stay the operation of Ext.P8 till the disposal of Ext.P9.

2. The petitioner submitted his bid for the work

"Reconstruction of compound wall with fencing on either side

of National Highway at Kariavattom Campus". The estimated

cost of the work was ₹98 lakhs. Three persons, namely

Appukuttan Pillai, Jayaraj (3rd respondent herein) and the

petitioner, submitted tenders pursuant to the notification. The

tender submitted by the petitioner was the lowest. However,

the tender submitted by the petitioner has been rejected on WP(C) No.20101/2021

the ground that Ext.P3 Experience Certificate produced by the

petitioner does not satisfy the requirement under the Notice

Inviting Tender (NIT). The work was ultimately awarded to the

3rd respondent.

3. It is the argument of the petitioner that the 3 rd

respondent also do not satisfy the experience condition

prescribed by the NIT. The petitioner would further submit

that the additional 4th respondent had submitted Ext.P5

concocted experience certificate. The manipulations in Ext.P5

is evident from Ext.P11 documents. When such manipulated

Experience Certificates were produced, the respondents

ought not have awarded the work to the 3 rd respondent or the

additional 4th respondent. Therefore, the award of tender is

liable to be interfered with by this Court.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1

and 2 entered appearance and contested the writ petition.

The learned Standing Counsel submitted that admittedly the

petitioner does not satisfy the experience conditions. The

argument of the petitioner is that since the person to whom WP(C) No.20101/2021

the tender is awarded finally is also not experienced, the

petitioner being the lowest tenderer, though he does not

satisfy the experience requirements, should have been

awarded the work. The said argument cannot be accepted.

When the petitioner does not possess requisite experience,

the petitioner cannot be heard to contend that the petitioner

should be awarded the work.

5. As regards the alleged manipulations in the

Experience Certificate of the additional 4 th respondent, the

additional 4th respondent has not been awarded the work.

Therefore, the said argument is also unsustainable. As

regards the Certificate of Experience submitted by the 3 rd

respondent, who is the selected candidate, he had sufficient

experience in construction of an Ayurvedic Research Institute

which includes the construction of the compound wall also.

Therefore, the award of tender to the 3 rd respondent is

justified.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents WP(C) No.20101/2021

1 and 2. In view of the nature of the relief to be granted in the

writ petition, notice to the 3rd respondent and the additional 4th

respondent is dispensed with.

7. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner does not

satisfy the conditions as to experience stipulated in the NIT.

Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get the work allotted

to him through these proceedings.

8. However, the petitioner has pointed out that the

other participants in the tender proceedings have submitted

concocted/fraudulent/insufficient documents evidencing their

experience. These certificates have been acted upon by

respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P9

representation to the 1st respondent pointing out these facts.

However, no action has been taken on Ext.P9 representation.

9. Going through Exts.P5 and P11, it appears that the

participants in the tender proceedings have produced doubtful

documents. In the circumstances, this Court is of the

considered view that the 1st respondent should consider

Ext.P9 representation and take appropriate action thereon, if WP(C) No.20101/2021

so warranted.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P9 representation

within a period of two months and take appropriate decision

thereon, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the 3 rd and

additional 4th respondents, if the situation so warrants.

Sd/-

                                        N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/24.11.2021
 WP(C) No.20101/2021




                  APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20101/2021

PETITIONER'S     EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1            PHOTOCOPY OF THE CONFIRMATION OF THE

BID SUBMISSION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 87.2021 Exhibit P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SCHEDULE OF WORK AND AMOUNT QUOTED BY THE PARTICIPANTS Exhibit P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA POLICE HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD DATED 14.03.2016 Exhibit P4 PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE DATED 29.7.2021 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LSGD SUB DIVISION PERUMKADAVILA Exhibit P5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATES SUBMITTED BY SRI.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI Exhibit P6 PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE DATED 9.6.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 PHOTOCOPY OF THE TENDER SUMMARY REPORTS DATED 10.9.2021 OF E-TENDERING SYSTEM GOVERNMENT OF KERALA Exhibit P8 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SELECTION NOTICE DATED 8.9.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P9 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.9.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P10 COPY OF NOTICE INVITING TENDER DT 18.6.2021 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA ENGINEERING UNIT Exhibit P11 COPY OF CERTIFICATE DT 14.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF ENGINEER, SPORTS ENGINEERING WING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM Exhibit P12 COPY OF WORK COMPLETION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO APPUKUTTAN PILLAI BY KHA CONSTRUCTION