Disposed

Ansar M. v. the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.

Kerala HC3 Dec 2019WP(C)/17268/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought cancellation of the fourth respondent's award and direction to award tender to him. Court directed first respondent to decide on awarding work to petitioner at fourth respondent's quoted rate before any fresh tender.

What did the court decide?

Directed first respondent to take a decision on awarding work to petitioner at fourth respondent's rate.

Ansar M. Vs the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. — Kerala HC (2019) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.17268 OF 2019(G)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ANSAR M., SHAJAHAN MANZIL, PADA SOUTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, P.B.NO.2030, ERNAKULAM - 682 020.

¶11

2 THE MANAGER (NATIONAL FOOD SECURITY ACT), KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, P.B.NO. 2030, ERNAKULAM - 682 020.

¶12

3 ASSISTANT MANAGER/DEPOT MANAGER, SUPPLYCO, KARUNAGAPPALLY - 690 518.

¶13

4 GODWIN JOSE, PROPRIETOR JRG AGENCIES, GODWIN SADANAM, BATHANIPURAM, KATTAKODE P.O., KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 572

¶14

¶15

W.P. (C) No. 17268 of 2019

¶16

5 ANAS A., SUMAYYA MANZIL, KAPPIKKA, POOVACHAL PO, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 575

¶17

R1 BY SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

W.P. (C) No. 17268 of 2019

¶21

W.P. (C) No. 17268 of 2019

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

The petitioner seeks in this writ petition directions to

¶24

respondents 1 to 3 to take steps to cancel the award made to

¶25

the fourth respondent for executing the transportation work pursuant to tender No. NFSA 5-31977/18 dated 6.12.2018.

¶26

When this matter was taken up today, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the award made in favour of the fourth respondent has already been cancelled by the first respondent. It was pointed out that the award has been made in favour of the fourth respondent as

¶27

the L1 tenderer and since the said award is cancelled and since L2 tenderer has already withdrawn from the tender process, the respondents are bound to award the tender to the petitioner. It is alleged that since the award made in favour of the fourth respondent has been cancelled, steps are being taken to float a fresh tender for the execution of the same work on the premise that the petitioner would not be interested to execute the work at the same rate at which the fourth respondent had

¶28

¶29

W.P. (C) No. 17268 of 2019

¶30

offered to execute the work. It was also pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel that the petitioner is prepared to carryout the work at the rate quoted by the fourth respondent and as such, since the said offer was once accepted, there is absolutely no need for a fresh tender.

¶31

In the aforesaid background, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the first respondent to take a decision as to whether the work could be awarded to the petitioner at the rate offered by the fourth respondent. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done before any further action is taken for re-arranging the work.

¶32

Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶33

YKB

¶34

¶35

W.P. (C) No. 17268 of 2019

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TECHNICAL BID SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE BID EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE STATE INFORMATION OFFICER, SUPPLYCO, KARUNAGAPPALLY EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE STATE INFORMATION OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF MR.ANAS EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT 13.3.2019 EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 13.3.2019 EXHIBIT P7 B TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 13.3.2019

¶39

¶40

W.P. (C) No. 17268 of 2019

¶41

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER CONDITIONS PUBLISHED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSISTANT MANAGER, KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION,KARUNAGAPPILLY EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO-16028/2019 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶42

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

YKB

Ansar M. v. the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ansar M. v. the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Master Gautham Prasanth Vs State of Kerala

Varghese Chacko Vs State of Kerala

Modern Steels Vs Kerala Chumattu Thozhilali Union

Vishalakshi Amma Vs State of Kerala

P.C.Thomas and Company Vs the Chief Engineer SZ111(ERSTWHILE)

Noorjahan.N.S Vs the General Manager, State Bank of India