Disposed

M/S.Wowels. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Kerala HC26 Oct 2021WP(C)/16478/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of the writ petition regarding the cancellation of a bus advertisement licence fee. It held that the request for similar treatment from the KURTC case lacked specific mention in the rejection order and directed the Principal Secretary to consider the matter independently after affording a hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Principal Secretary, Transport Department, to consider the petitioner's request regarding similar treatment independently after affording an opportunity of hearing.

M/S.Wowels. Vs Kerala State Road Transport… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 26^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 4TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 16478 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S.WOWELS,T.C. 14/2061, VANROSS JUNCTION, UNIVERSITY P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, R.VINOD, S/O.P.RAVINDRAN NAIR, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT VISHNUPRIYA, T.C.21/168(1), N.S.S. KARAYOGAM ROAD, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 002. BY ADVS. K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH M.K.SUMOD

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶10

2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶11

3 THE ESTATE OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶12

4 THE JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT-GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695 001.

¶13

5 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶14

BY ADV DEEPU THANKAN GP SRI.SUNIL.V.K

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

On 25.09.2018, K.S.R.T.C invited tenders for

¶20

grant of licence for display of advertisement on K.S.R.T.C ordinary buses for a period of five years.

¶21

As per the tender notice the number of buses available for advertisement was stated to be 3750. The petitioner being the highest bidder, the tender was confirmed in his favour. Due to various factors including flood and Covid 19 Pandemic, only 2500 buses were available for advertising. Therefore, the petitioner made Ext P12 request seeking 50% reduction in the license fee for the financial year 2020-2021. The estate officer, as per Ext P13 communication cancelled the licence. On the request of the petitioner, the governing board of K.S.R.T.C decided to revoke the order cancelling the licence on condition that the arrears are paid. The same was communicated to the petitioner as per Ext P17.

¶22

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶23

¶24

Identical grievance raised by a similarly

¶25

situated person, with regard to licence from Kerala Urban Road Transport Corporation(KURTC) which is a sister concern/subsidiary of K.S.R.T.C, benefit was granted to the contractor by limiting the liability to the actual number of buses that were available for advertisement. Ext P16 is the copy of such order. Claiming similar treatment, the petitioner submitted request before the authorities including the Principal Secretary – Transport(Ext P12). This Court in W.P(C) No.4334 of 2021 directed consideration of the said request.

¶26

The request was considered by the Joint Secretary (Transport) and rejected the

¶27

representation as per Ext.P23 order. It is aggrieved thereby that the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶29

and also the learned standing counsel for the Corporation.

¶30

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶31

¶32

The contention of the petitioner is that

¶33

similarly situated person was granted a very reasonable settlement by the subsidiary Corporation K.U.R.T.C by requiring collection of licence fee based on the actual number of buses that were available for advertisement. It was seeking grant of such benefit that the petitioner had submitted Ext P21 representation before the Principal Secretary. It appears that the request for similar treatment was not specifically adverted to while passing Ext P23 order. The petitioner being similarly placed as the contractor in Ext P18, he is entitled for a similar treatment, submits the learned counsel.

¶34

Considering the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the

¶35

Principal Secretary may consider the issue if approached by the petitioner. Accordingly it is ordered that if the petitioner submits a

¶36

representation before the Principal Secretary, Transport department, the same shall be considered

¶37

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶38

¶39

by him taking due note of Ext P18, independent of Ext.P23, and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶40

Writ petition disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN

JUDGE

vdv

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16478/2021

¶48

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶49

Exhibit	P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACTS OF THE
	REGISTRATION DETAILS ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF FIRMS.
Exhibit	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE DATED 25.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER CONDITIONS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE (LOA) NO.ES3/023300/2018 DATED 20.03.2019.
Exhibit	P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.WW.NO.18821/08/19 DATED 29.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC.
Exhibit	P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CASH RECEIPT DATED 22.04.2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY KSRTC.
Exhibit	P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DATED 12.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE ESTATE OFFICER KSRTC.
Exhibit	P8 TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS & SERVICES TAX REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF M/S. CHAKRA COMMUNICATIONS.
Exhibit	P9 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 01.02.2018 BETWEEN KSRTC AND M/S. CHAKRA COMMUNICATION.
Exhibit	P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.E.S3/023321/2016 DATED 05.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC TO M/S. CHAKRA COMMUNICATIONS.

¶50

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶51

¶52

Exhibit P11	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D.SE/023321 DATED 03.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE ESTATE OFFICER KSRTC TO M/S. CHAKRA COMMUNICATIONS.
Exhibit P12	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 09.06.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ESTATE OFFICER KSRTC.
Exhibit P13	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ES3/023300/2018 DATED 16.07.2020 OF THE ESTATE OFFICER KSRTC.
Exhibit P14	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.07.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FIRM TO THE ESTATE OFFICER KSRTC.
Exhibit P15	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC DATED 28.08.2020.
Exhibit P16	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC DATED 28.09.2020.
Exhibit P17	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ES3/023300/2018 DATED 02.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE ESTATE OFFICER, KSRTC.
Exhibit P18	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.TRANS- A2/326/2019 TRANS DATED 12.12.2019 OF THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT.
Exhibit P19	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.ES3/023300/2018 DATED 14.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC.
Exhibit P20	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 24.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC.
Exhibit P21	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED

¶53

W.P(C) NO.16478 OF 2021

¶54

¶55

15.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT.

¶56

Exhibit P22 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.03.2021 IN WPC 4334/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. Exhibit P23 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER GO9RT) NO.247/2021/TRANS DATED 16.07.2021 PASSED BY THE JOINT SECRETARY OF THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT. Exhibit P24 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PROCEEDINGS NOTES OF FILE NO TRANSA2/326/2019 -TRANS

M/S.Wowels. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Wowels. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

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

P.M.Rajan Vs Biju.B.

Sneharaj Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Ajanthakumar.K.S Vs the Regional Transport Authority

P.K.Satyapalan Vs the Transport Commissioner

P.M.Shemeer Vs the Regional Transport Authority

The Thalappalam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.3937 Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Society (General)