This writ petition challenged the government decision to award a public works contract to a different bidder. The court dismissed the petition upon the submission that the work was already awarded and completed by the additional respondent in 2015.
dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to avail any other remedy.
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 MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 8501 OF 2015
PETITIONER:
P. ASSAIN HAJI AGED 49 YEARS S/O. MOIDEEN KUTTY HAJI, PWD CONTRACTOR, PULLAT HOUSE, ACHANAMBALAM, KANNAMANGALAM P. O., VENGARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676 304.
BY ADVS. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL
RESPONDENTS:
*ADDL. P.M. BASHEER R4 S/O. MOOSA, MANNAMTHODI HOUSE, MELMURI P. O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
*** IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 27.05.2015 IN IA NO.5988/2015.**
SRI. N.N. SUGUNAPALAN, SR. SRI. S. SUJIN SRI. C.N PRABHAKARAN - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.8501 OF 2015
2
JUDGMENT
The 1st respondent floated tender for the work
'Budget work 2014-2015 providing drain with foot path (Othakkungal Town) between Km 19/600 to 20/200 of Tirur – Malappuram Road in Malappuram District'. The petitioner was the lowest bidder. The writ petition is filed for direction to the 1st respondent to award the work to the petitioner who is the lowest bidder.
WP(C).No.8501 OF 2015
3
additional 4th respondent and he executed agreement on 19.03.2015 and has completed the work.
In the light of the submission that the work was awarded to the additional 4th respondent in 2005, the prayers sought for by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to avail any other remedy as may be available in law.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE
SPR
WP(C).No.8501 OF 2015
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE DATED 30-01-2015. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED ALONG WITH TENDER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER REGARDING BM AND BC WORK. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 09-032015 OF PETITIONER ADDRESSED TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be granted directing the respondents to award the work to the petitioner as the lowest bidder despite the work being awarded and completed to another respondent.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a reconsideration of the tender award after the contract has been executed by a different bidder.
P. Assain Haji
Superintending Engineer PWD Roads and Bridges, North Circle, Kozhikode
Chief Engineer, PWD Roads and Bridges, Thiruvananthapuram
State of Kerala represented by the Secretary, Public Works Department, Thiruvananthapuram
Addl. P.M. Basheer
Murali Purushothaman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
