The Court dismissed this writ appeal against a judgment declining to interfere with public works contracts awarded to an accredited cooperative society, upholding the State's right to prescribe qualifying norms including accreditation. The petitioners' contention that equal opportunity required inviting all contractors was rejected.
null
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 THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ANTONY DOMINIC &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1939
WA.No.1117 of 2017 IN WPC.39162/2016
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)39162/2016 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 23-03-2017
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
MUVATTUPUZHA- 686 661
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR.SABU THOMAS
WA.No. 1117 of 2017
:: 2 ::
WA.No. 1117 of 2017
:: 3 ::
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
WA.No. 1117 of 2017
:: 4 ::
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC, C.J. & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Writ Appeal No.1117 of 2017
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT
Antony Dominic, C.J.
The writ petition was filed by an Association of contractors and certain individual contractors. In the writ petition, their main prayer was against Exts.P11 and P33 Government Orders and the direction sought was to require the State to award public works covered by Exts.P1, P33 and all future works by inviting open tenders. By the judgment under appeal, the learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the works, in respect of which contracts have already been entered into with the 11th respondent/society. Insofar as the cases where contracts have not been entered into, including Ext.P33, the learned Single Judge set aside the awards and Ext.P33 order and directed the State to invite expression or tender or offers either
from the contractors generally or from accredited contractors
W.A.1117 of 2017
: 2 :
scheduled to Ext.P6 and finalise the proceedings. It is this judgment, which is challenged by the appellants, who are the writ petitioners.
W.A.1117 of 2017
: 3 :
contractors and such a system is not objectionable. If the argument that every contractor is entitled to every work is accepted, that will also be disastrous. Therefore, we are unable to accept the contention now advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants.
The above being the only issue raised and that having been rejected, the appeal merits only to be dismissed and we do so.
Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE
jes
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the State could restrict eligibility for public works contracts to accredited contractors under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Whether the requirement to invite tenders from all contractors is mandatory under Article 14.
M/s Builders Association of India and others
The State of Kerala and others
Antony Dominic
Dama Seshadri Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
