The Court addressed a writ petition challenging the rejection of the petitioner's tender for theatre chairs. Finding defects in prior supplies, the Court held the tendering authority acted bona fide and was not arbitrary in rejecting the lowest bid. The petition was dismissed.
The Writ Petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.
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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/15TH POUSHA, 1936
WP(C).No. 30557 of 2014 (T) ----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
M/S. INNOVATIVE SEATINGS PVT. LTD. 2, T.C.PARIKH ESTATE, OPP.HARIHAR STEEL PRODUCTS WADI YAMUNA ROAD, PRATA NAGAR VADODHARA GUJARATH 390004, REP.BY DIRECTOR.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.SUDHEESHKAR SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTEDBY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE KERALA STATE FILIM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD CHALACHITRA KALABHAVAN, VAZHUTHAKADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DITRECTOR.
3. M/S.PEN WORKERS LTD PALKIWALA HOUSE, 648, JAGANATH SHANKER SHETH ROAD DHOBI TALAO, MUMBAI 400002, REP.BY DIRECTOR.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN, SC, KSFDC R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.AZAD BABU R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.REKHA R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER: SMT ANITHA RAVEENDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 30557 of 2014 (T)
2
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT-P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RE-TENDER NO.3355/T2/2014 KSFDC, DATED 31.07.2014.
EXHIBIT-P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE BID SUMISSION CONFIRMATION DATED 21.07.2014.
EXHIBIT-P3:THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.08.2014 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.3355/T2/14/KSFDC DATED 16.09.2014 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 30.05.2013 FROM THE 2nd RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PWD MANUAL, REVISED EDITION 2012
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R2(a): A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD 07.08.2013 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND the 2nd RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT R2(b): A TRUE COPY OF ONE OF THE EMAIL DTD 25.07.2014 SENT BY the SECOND RESPONDENT TO the PETITIONER AND the REPLY GIVEN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R2(c): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 05.08.2014 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO the PETITIONER
EXHIBIT R2(d): A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC DETAILS, RELATING TO THE SAID E-TENDER DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE
EXHIBIT R2(e): TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DTD 05.08.2014 UPLOADED BY 2nd RESPONDENT IN WEBSITE OF the GOVT. OF KERALA
EXHIBIT R2(f): PHOTOGRAPH OF the SAMPLE CHAIRS PROVIDED BY THE PETITIONER AND the 3rd RESPONDENT FOR the TWIN THEATRE OF THE 2nd RESPONDENT AT ALAPPUZHA
EXHIBIT R2(g): TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD 21.11.2014 ISSUED BY the 2nd RESPONDENT TO the PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 01/12/2014 RECEIVED BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT FROM THE 2nd RESPONDENT
WP(C).No. 30557 of 2014 (T)
3
EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 01/08/2014 SENT BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT TO the 2nd RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT R3(C): TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL SPORTS CLUB OF INDIA, MUMBAI TO the 3rd RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT R3(d): TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY the MAHARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, PUNE TO the 3rd RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT R3(e): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 11/11/2011 SENT BY E- SQUARE LEISURE PVT. LTD TO M/S.UNIQUE SPACE SYSTEMS PVT LTD.
True Copy/
P A to Judge
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
=========================
W.P(C).No.30557 of 2014T
============================ Dated this the 05th day of January, 2015
JUDGMENT
This writ petition pertains to tender for supply and installation of theatre chairs. The second respondent issued Ext.P1 re-tender for the purpose of supplying and fixing auditorium chairs in the existing and proposed theatres belonged to the second respondent/Corporation at Thrissur, Cherthala and Allappuzha. Petitioner is the second lowest bidder. The lowest bidder withdrew from the tender process. According to the petitioner, they are entitled for the supply of chairs in the wake of withdrawal by the lowest bidder. Petitioner submits that he has been arbitrarily singled out from awarding the contract. Thus, petitioner approached this Court.
W.P(C).No.30557 of 2014T
2
at Thiruvananthapuram, Allappuzha and Kozhikode on 28.07.2012. It is submitted that petitioner was the lower tenderer and agreement was executed with the petitioner. However, it is noted that serious defects were noticed on chairs supplied by the petitioner at theatre in Kozhikode. Petitioner also did not cure the defects in spite of repeated reminders. It is also pointed out since petitioner failed to cure the defects, second respondent did not issue work order to the petitioner in respect of theatre at Allappuzha. It is thereafter Ext.P1 notice was issued for supply of chairs at Thrissur, Cherthala and Allapuzha. It is further submitted that the third respondent though quoted higher amount than the petitioner reduced the rate and thereafter work was awarded to the third respondent. The third respondent filed a counter stating that they have already executed the work in relation to theatres at Thrissur and Cherthala and only work relating to Allappuzha is remaining. The case of the second respondent is that it is on account of defects of the chairs supplied by the petitioner in respect of theatre at Kozhikode, they are unable to consider petitioner for supply of the chairs. They also rely on various communications issued in this regard.
W.P(C).No.30557 of 2014T
3
whether merely because petitioner was the lowest tenderer, is entitled for the award of work.
W.P(C).No.30557 of 2014T
4
Cattle Feed Industries [(1993) 1 SCC 71] held as follows:-
“From the above, it is clear that even though the highest tenderer can claim no right to have his tender accepted, there being a power while inviting tenders to reject all the tenders, yet the power to reject all the tenders cannot be exercised arbitrarily and must depend for its validity on the existence of cogent reasons for such action.”
In the light of above dictum, the rejection of tender of the petitioner was on valid reason and the petitioner cannot claim any vested right to command the respondent to accept their lowest tender.
Accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.
Sbna/
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a tenderer has a vested right to acceptment of his tender merely because he is the lowest bidder.
Whether rejection of a tender due to defects in previously supplied goods without malafide constitutes arbitrariness.
Whether the decision making process of the authority was evolved to secure public interest thereby precluding judicial interference.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Food Corporation of India v. M/s.Kamdhenu Cattle Feed IndustriesReferred¶60
Food Corporation of India v. M/s.Kamdhenu Cattle Feed Industries [(1993) 1 SCC 71] · Who else cites this
M/S. INNOVATIVE SEATINGS PVT. LTD.
THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTEDBY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS
THE KERALA STATE FILIM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
M/S.PEN WORKERS LTD
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
