Kerala High Court
Mahesh.M.A vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited on 16 April, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 1 2025:KER:32523
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 26TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 3939 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
MAHESH.M.A
AGED 42 YEARS, SON OF AYYAPPANKUTTY,
RESIDING AT ECHIKKOTTIL HOUSE, 81,
CHITHRANJALI ROAD, THRIVANKULAM.PO,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682305
BY ADVS. SRI.N.J.MATHEWS
SRI.ABDEL BENNET JACOB LAWYER
RESPONDENTS:
1 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED
'A' INSTALLATION SEWREE 4TH ROAD, SEWREE EAST,
MUBMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
PIN - 400015
2 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED
BPCL IRUMPANAM INSTALLATION (1301),
IRIMPANAM INSTALLATION SEAPORT- AIRPORT ROAD,
IRIMPANAM P.O, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY LOCATION-
IN-CHARGE, SHAJI HAKEEM, PIN - 682309
BY ADVS. SRI.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR M
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI(K/413/1984)
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN(J-526)
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS(K/131/2003)
SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM(MAH/58/2006)
SRI.RAJA KANNAN(K/356/2008)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, THE COURT ON 16.04.2025 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 2 2025:KER:32523
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.3939 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of April, 2025
JUDGMENT
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ― the
respondents ― had published Ext.P1 tender notification inviting
tenders for 229 TOP loading tanker lorries ('lorries', in short) for
road transportation of bulk petroleum products from their
Irumpanam Installation to various locations within and outside
the State of Kerala for a period of 5 years. In terms of Clause 8
of Ext.P1 notification, persons belonging to Scheduled Caste
and Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) communities are entitled to
reservation in the tender. The petitioner belongs to the SC
category. He submitted Ext.P2 bid to the tender. The petitioner
had booked two vehicles from Popular Mega Motors (India) Pvt:
Ltd, a dealer of Tata Motors Limited. In Ext.P4 list of the eligible
bidders published by the respondents, the petitioner is placed at
ordinary Rank No.3. The petitioner has learnt that 20 persons
have been awarded the contract. Among the 20 persons with
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 3 2025:KER:32523
ordinary Rank Nos.4, 15 and 17 have been awarded the tender.
There are also certain benami persons on the list. The
respondents' action is arbitrary and violates the rights of
equality guaranteed to the petitioner under the Constitution of
India. Hence, the writ petition may be allowed.
2. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit
denying the averments in the writ petition. They have contended
that an alternative mechanism is provided under Clause 32 of
Ext.P1 notification. Moreover, the writ petition is bad for the non-
joinder of the necessary parties because the petitioners have
not impleaded the 18 technically qualified bidders. As per
Ext.P1 tender notification, the total requirement of lorries was
189 12KL/14KL capacity lorries and 40 20KL/24KL capacity
lorries viz., a total of 229 lorries. The tender was finalised, and
letters of intent were issued to the successful tenderers on
27.12.2024, who had executed the agreements with the
respondents. The lorries are operational, and the tender is
closed. The allotment procedure was clearly explained to all the
bidders in the pre-bid meeting, evident from Ext.R1 (a) minutes.
Ext.P1 tender was a two-bid system ― the technical and price
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 4 2025:KER:32523
bids. Seventy-nine bids were received in response to Ext.P1
notification. Based on the trucks offered, 47 bidders, including
the petitioner, have been allocated lorries/booking slips. The
petitioner had applied under the SC category by offering two
lorries against chassis booking slips. As far as allotment to the
SC category with booking slips is concerned, it is governed by
Clause 8.2, which explicitly stipulates that lorries offered
through booking slips will be considered for allotment only if
sufficient ready-built lorries are not offered in the respective
category. This has also been unambiguously spelt out in
Clauses 26.5(j) and 26.12 of Ext.P1 notification. As per Clause
11.1, 35 lorries are tentatively reserved for allocation to SC
category bidders. In the present tender, 22 technically qualified
bidders under the SC category had cumulatively offered 56
ready-built lorries and 75 booking slips. The allocation for the
SC category was done as per Clause 26.11 of the Ext.P1, and
the entire reservation quota for the SC category was filled by
the ready-built lorries (10 bidders were allocated 35 ready-built
lorries). The allocation of lorries offered against booking slips
will be considered only if readily built lorries are unavailable.
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 5 2025:KER:32523
Hence, the writ petition is meritless and is only to be dismissed.
3. Heard; Sri.N.J.Mathews, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt.Ramola Nayanpally, the learned counsel for
the respondents.
4. The core of the dispute concerns the allocation of
lorries under Ext.P1 notification to persons belonging to the SC
category.
5. The petitioner belongs to the SC category. He
participated in Ext.P1 tender on the strength of a chassis
booking slip. He alleges that, although he is placed at ordinary
Rank No.3, the respondents have allocated the lorries to
bidders lower than his rank. The respondents contend that as
per Clause 26.5 (j) and 26.12 of Ext.P1 notification, the persons
with chassis booking slips would be awarded the contract only
when readily built lorries are unavailable.
6. In the above context, it is profitable to refer to
Clauses 26.5(j) and 26.12 of Ext.P1 tender notification, which
reads as follows:
"26.5 (j) Allocation for tank lorries offered against chassis booking
slips will be considered only if sufficient ready-built tank lorries are
not available in a particular ranking/category."
"26.12 Allocation of Booking Slips:
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 6 2025:KER:32523
a) Allocation for tank lorries offered against chassis Booking slips
will be considered only if sufficient ready-built tank lorries are not
available in a particular ranking/category.
b) Booking Slip shall be allocated as per shortfall, for SC
Category and ST category separately.
c) Booking slip shall be allocated at the overall tender level."
7. The above tender conditions state unequivocally that
the bidders who participated in the tender based on chassis
booking slips will be awarded the tender only when there are no
readily available ready-built lorries.
8. It is after being fully conscious of the above tender
conditions that the petitioner has participated in the bid with the
chassis booking slip. It is too late in the day for the petitioner to
contend that he ought to be considered at par with those
bidders who have offered ready-built lorries. The preference
given to the bidders with readily built lorries over bidders like the
petitioner is reasonable and justifiable. Unlike the petitioner, the
bidders with readily-built lorries are placed on a higher pedestal
because they have already purchased the vehicles. Therefore,
the petitioner's contention that his fundamental right guaranteed
under Article 14 of the Constitution of India has been violated is
untenable.
9. In Afcons Infrastructure Ltd v. Nagpur Metro Rail
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 7 2025:KER:32523
Corporation Ltd. And Another [(2016) 16 SCC 818], the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the constitutional Courts
must defer to the understanding that the employer of a project
having authored the tender documents, is the best person to
understand and appreciate the requirements and interpret the
documents unless there is mala fides or perversity in the
understanding or applying the terms of the tender conditions. It
is possible that the owner or employer of a project may give an
interpretation to the tender documents that is not acceptable to
the constitutional Courts, but that by itself is not a reason for
interfering with the interpretation given.
After bestowing my anxious consideration to the facts
and the materials on record, especially the tender conditions
extracted above, I am satisfied that there is no illegality or
arbitrariness in the action of the respondents in awarding the
tender to those bidders with readily built lorries. The writ
petition sans substance or merits and is only to be dismissed.
Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
W.P (C) No.3939 of 2025 8 2025:KER:32523
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3939/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
THE TENDER DATED 19/6/2024 SO PUBLISHED
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER SO SUBMITTED
TO THE RESPONDENTS BY HIM
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CUSTOMER ORDER FORM,
FOR HAVING BOOKED TWO VEHICLES FROM
TATA MOTORS' LIMITED THROUGH THEIR
COMMERCIAL VEHICLE DEALER POPULAR MEGA
MOTORS (INDIA) PVT LIMITED, ERNAKULAM
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COY OF THE LIST OF SUCCESSFUL AND
ELIGIBLE BIDDERS PUBLISHED IN THE
WEBSITE
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R1 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED
08.07.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
