Ajeesh A.S vs District Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 7188 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
    THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1944
                    WP(C) NO. 17490 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:

    1     AJEESH A.S
          SUDHA SADANAM, MOONGODE PO, VARKALA,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695144.
    2     ANUMON.M.S
          KARTHIKA, PERAPPU, VATTATHAMARA.PO, KOLLAM-691536.
    3     A.S. ALANCHAND .
          AERAVEEDU, KATAIKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695584.
          BY ADV C.S.SUNIL

RESPONDENTS:
     1    DISTRICT COLLECTOR
          TRIVANDRUM ,CHAIRMAN, TRIVANDRUM GOVERNMENT MEDICAL
          COLLEGE HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY. 695010.
    2     PRINCIPAL, MEDICAL COLLEGE,
          TRIVANDRUM VICE CHAIRMAN, TRIVANDRUM GOVERNMENT
          MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY. 695010.
    3     SUPERINTENDENT, MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL,
          TRIVANDRUM SECRETARY AND CONVENER, TRIVANDRUM
          GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT
          SOCIETY. 695010.
          BY ADVS.
          GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL
          M.S.VIJAYACHANDRAN BABU


          GP P.S.APPU



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P. (C ) No. 17490 of 2022
                                        2




                         V.G.ARUN, J.
               -------------------------------------
                 W.P. (C ) No. 17490 of 2022
               -------------------------------------
                    Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2022


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioners are participated in the tender for conducting

Cafeterias at the Trivandrum Medical College Hospital. The bids

submitted by the petitioners as per Exts.P2, P3 and P4 was rejected

for the reason that the petitioners failed to furnish sufficient Earnest

Money Deposit (EMD).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners drew attention to the

handwritten entry in Ext.P1. The entry is to the following effect,

"EMD-1%". It is contended that since what exactly is meant by the

1% was not discernible, the petitioners deposited 1% of the monthly

rental quoted by them.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent

submitted that the EMD to be furnished is 1% of the annual rental

value and not 1% of the monthly rental value. W.P. (C ) No. 17490 of 2022

4. I heard the learned Government Pleader also.

5. In my considered opinion, no mention being made in

Ext.P1 as to what exactly is meant by EMD of 1%, the petitioners

cannot be faulted for having furnished 1% of monthly rental as EMD.

If EMD is 1% of the annual rental, then the petitioners ought to be

granted an opportunity to remit that amount. Learned counsel for

the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are the highest bidders

and are willing to pay the EMD fixed by the respondents.

6. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3 rd

respondent to inform the petitioners the amount of EMD to be

deposited and permit the petitioners to deposit that amount. If the

amount is deposited, the petitioners bid shall also be considered.

The interim order against finalisation of the tender shall continue to

be force for ten days.

Sd/-V.G.ARUN JUDGE

lsn W.P. (C ) No. 17490 of 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17490/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE DATED 25-4.2022.

Exhibit P2 HE TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER FORM SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER. DATED 26-5-2022 FOR TENDER NO.3/2021.

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER FORM SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. D 26-5-2022 FOR TENDER 3/2011 Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER FORM SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER. 26-5-202L FOR TENDER â„-. 3 / 2021.

    RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:        NIL




                                                    TRUE COPY




                                                 P.A TO JUDGE




    LSN