Court held that the notification inviting tenders which provided only two days instead of mandated minimum days violated guidelines. Ordered respondents to consider the petitioner's tender submitted via registered post.
Directed respondents to consider petitioner's tender along with other tenders as submitted within time.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2012/27TH POUSHA 1933
WPC.No. 469 of 2012 (G)
PETITIONER(S):
K.SODARAN GOVT. 'A' CLASS CONTRACTOR, SREEKRISHNA NILAYAM KAVADIVILA PADINJATTATHIL, EDAMULACKAL, ANCHAL KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN
SRI.C.K.PRASAD
SRI.T.S.ANURAJ SRI.B.S.ROSHAN SRI.C.R.SUGATHAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (NATIONAL HIGHWAY) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER NATIONAL HIGHWAY, SOUTH ZONE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-01-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
LSN
WPC.No. 469 of 2012 (G)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
LSN
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 469 of 2012
==================
Dated this the 17th day of January, 2012 J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a PWD contractor. The 3rd respondent published Ext.P1 notification inviting tenders for cetain works. The notification was published on 13.12.2011. The last date for receipt of tenders was 4.30 pm. on 15.12.2011. That gave only two days for intending tenderers, despite which, the petitioner sent his tender by registered post, which was delivered on 15.12.2011. But the respondents refused to consider the same on the ground that it was received 45 minutes late, insofar as, as per Ext.P1, the tenders should have reached the 3rd respondent before 4.30 p.m. on 15.12.2011 and it was received 45 minutes after 4.30 p.m. The petitioner challenges the action of the respondents based on Ext.P4 Government order, wherein the Government has issued guidelines in respect of notification inviting tenders. According to the petitioner, as per the said Government order, the period allowed between the date of advertisement and the tender date for the works costing upto 2 lakhs is 5 days, for the works costing 2 lakhs to 15 lakhs is 10 days and for the works costing above ` 15 lakhs is 20 days. Therefore, in this case, at least 20 days should have been given, in place of which, only two days were given, which is against the Government directive in this regard, is the
w.p.c.469/12 - : 2 :-
petitioner's contention. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following
reliefs;
that the the guidelines have subsequently been modified, as per which, only seven days' time is to be given.
Pleader, Ext.P1 is in violation of the guidelines insofar as it gives only two days and not seven days. In the above circumstances, I am of opinion that the tender submitted by the petitioner should also be considered by the respondents. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to consider the petitioner's tender also as one submitted within time along with other tenders received.
sdk+
Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
w.p.c.469/12 - : 3 :-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the tender rejected as late is to be reconsidered in light of violation of noticed guidelines regarding minimum advertisement period.
As per Govt. Order 84/97, whether the notification giving only two days for tender submission is in violation of guidelines.
Whether the writ petition should be disposed allowing consideration of the petitioner's tender.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.SODARAN GOVT. 'A' CLASS CONTRACTOR, SREEKRISHNA NILAYAM KAVADIVILA PADINJATTATHIL, EDAMULACKAL, ANCHAL KOLLAM
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (NATIONAL HIGHWAY)
THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER NATIONAL HIGHWAY, SOUTH ZONE
S.SIRI JAGAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
