Kerala High Court
B.A.Shereef vs Kerala Water Authority on 29 February, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 8013 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
B.A.SHEREEF, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. KHADER,
RESIDING AT BERKA HOUSE, EDNEER.P.O.,
NELLIKATTA, KASARGOD., PIN - 671541
BY ADVS.
P.SHANES METHAR
N.KRISHNA PRASAD
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REP. BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR, JALA BHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM,
THIRUVANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695055
2 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
PH CIRCLE, KANNUR., PIN - 670012
SRI.P.M.JOHNY - SC, R1 R2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 8013/24
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court with a singular plea
that the respondent - Kerala Water Authority ('KWA') be directed to
allow him to execute an agreement with them, without insisting to
furnish an 'Additional Performance Guarantee', since he has quoted
5.72% above the PAC amount mentioned in the tender.
2. Sri.P.Shanes Mather - learned counsel for the petitioner,
submitted that his client's request for exemption from furnishing
'Additional Performance Guarantee' has already been answered in
his favour by a learned Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.725
of 2023 and connected matters. He, therefore, prayed that the Water
Authority be directed to execute the contract with his client, without
insisting on 'Additional Performance Guarantee', adverting to the
afore decision, without any avoidable delay.
3. However, Sri.P.M.Johny - learned Standing Counsel for
the 'KWA', responded to the afore request of the petitioner, saying
that, factually, there are differences in the situation of the
petitioner, with that which was noticed by the learned Division
Bench in the aforesaid judgment. He submitted that, therefore, this
Court may allow the competent Authority of the 'KWA' to consider
this aspect, after hearing the petitioner and then take a decision on
his eligibility for exemption from 'Additional Performance
Guarantee'.
4. There is no doubt that the afore suggestion of
Sri.P.M.Johny is the best available because, the question whether
the afore precedent would apply to the petitioner; and, if so, the
nature of the reliefs that would be entitled to him, are matters in
the factual and documentary realm, which cannot be decided by this
Court, while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, at
the first instance.
In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and direct
the competent Authority of the 'KWA' to hear the petitioner,
adverting to the judgment of the learned Division Bench in
W.A.No.725/2023 and connected matters; thus culminating in an
appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as
is possible, but not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this judgment.
Needless to say, depending upon the afore decision, the
contract shall be entered into by the 'KWA' with the petitioner
appropriately; for which purpose, all contentions as regards the
quantum of 'Additional Performance Guarantee', if any to be
insisted, are left open.
Sd/-
RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8013/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE E- TENDER NO. 147/2023-
24/PHC/KNR DATED 10-11-2023 (RELEVANT
PAGES) PUBLISHED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE
(LOA) DATED 07.02.2024 ISSUED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.8.2023
IN WA.NO.725 OF 2023 AND CONNECTED CASES
OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT
