Partly allowed

Bhadora Industries Pvt. Limited v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Kerala HC19 Dec 2023WP(C)/10564/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the Kerala State Electricity Board must afford an opportunity of hearing before terminating contracts and imposing risk and costs. Consequently, WP(C) No. 5276/2023 directed the Board to hear the petitioner regarding risk/cost quantification, while WP(C) No. 10564/2023 quashed the termination order and risk/cost quantification order issued without a hearing.

What did the court decide?

WP(C) 5276/2023 allowed directing hearing for quantification; WP(C) 10564/2023 allowed quashing termination and quantification with direction for reconsideration after hearing.

Bhadora Industries Pvt. Limited Vs Kerala State… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 5276 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

BHADORA INDUSTRIES PVT LIMITED, 4SU INDUSTRIAL
ESTATE, DHONGA, TIKAMGARH, MADYA PRADESH - 472001.
REPRESENTED BY DIRECTORS, ANIL BHADORA, S/O LATE
DR. P.C. BHADORA, AGED 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT BORI
DARWAJA, TIKAMGARH, MADYA PRADESH – 472 001 AND
PRADEEP BHADORA, S/O LATE DR. P.C. BHADORA, AGED
56 YEARS, RESIDING AT BORI DARWAJA, TIKAMGARH,
MADYA PRADESH – 472 001 REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER
OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SAMEER BABU K., AGED 40 YEARS,
S/O. KUNHAMMU K., KOTTAYIL HOUSE, ATHIRAMADA,
RANDATHANI P.O, KALPAKANCHERI, MALAPPURAM
PIN: 676 510, PIN – 676510

¶8

BY ADVS.
O.A.NURIYA
REVATHY P. MANOHARAN
ANAND B. MENON
NEBIL NIZAR
ASHEEK ANTONY

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF ENGINEER (SCM),
CORPORATE OFFICE, VIDYUT BHAVAN, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004, PIN – 695004

¶11

2KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD
REPRESENTED BY COMPANY SECRETARY,
CORPORATE OFFICE, VIDYUT BHAVAN, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004, PIN – 695004

¶12

BY ADVS.
NIRMAL S
JOSEPH ANTONY C
JOSEPH JOSE(K/000784/2022)

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.12.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.10564/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶15

¶16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶17

PRESENT

¶18

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶19

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 10564 OF 2023

¶20

PETITIONER:

¶21

BHADORA INDUSTRIES PVT LIMITED, 4SU INDUSTRIAL
ESTATE, DHONGA, TIKAMGARH, MADYA PRADESH - 472001.
REPRESENTED BY DIRECTORS, ANIL BHADORA, S/O LATE
DR. P.C. BHADORA, AGED 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT BORI
DARWAJA, TIKAMGARH, MADYA PRADESH – 472 001 AND
PRADEEP BHADORA, S/O LATE DR. P.C. BHADORA, AGED
56 YEARS, RESIDING AT BORI DARWAJA, TIKAMGARH,
MADYA PRADESH – 472 001 REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER
OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SAMEER BABU K., AGED 40 YEARS,
S/O. KUNHAMMU K., KOTTAYIL HOUSE, ATHIRAMADA,
RANDATHANI P.O, KALPAKANCHERI, MALAPPURAM
PIN: 676 510, PIN – 676510

¶22

BY ADVS.
O.A.NURIYA
K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
REVATHY P. MANOHARAN
NEBIL NIZAR
ANAND B. MENON

¶23

RESPONDENTS:

¶24

1KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF ENGINEER (SCM),
CORPORATE OFFICE, VIDYUT BHAVAN, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004, PIN – 695004
2KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD
REPRESENTED BY COMPANY SECRETARY,
CORPORATE OFFICE, VIDYUT BHAVAN, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004, PIN – 695004

¶25

BY ADVS.
NIRMAL.S
JOSEPH ANTONY C
JOSEPH JOSE(K/000784/2022)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.12.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C)No.5276/2023, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶28

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

[WP(C) Nos.5276/2023, 10564/2023]

¶31

The petitioner in these two matters is stated to be a company,

¶32

which had been awarded with three contracts, by the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB).

¶33

Sri.Jaju Babu – learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Smt.Nuriya - appearing for the petitioner, pointed out that, among

¶34

the afore two writ petitions, WP(C)No. 5276/2023 was filed at a time when the “KSEB” issued an order dated 03.12.2022 (produced as Ext.P31 therein), based on a resolution which appears to have been adopted by them to foreclose the contracts given to his client, namely Exts.P4 and P5 Purchase Orders, imposing risk and cost on them. He showed me that there were amounts pending against certain invoices raised by his client, on account of the supply of coils to the KSEB; and therefore, that they have sought that the aforementioned Ext.P31 be quashed; and the eligible amounts be directed to be paid to them.

¶35

Sri.Jaju Babu, thereafter, conceded that, when the afore

¶36

writ petition was pending, the “KSEB” terminated one of the

¶37

¶38

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶39

contracts in question, imposing risk and cost against his client; which was then assailed by them, filing WP(C)No.10564/2023 -

¶40

producing the said order as Ext.P35 therein. He submitted that,

¶41

however, the interesting aspect of this case is that, in spite of Ext.P35, his client was awarded Ext.P40 contract thereafter; and

¶42

that they have completed the same, without any objections being raised.

¶43

Sri.Jaju Babu explained that, therefore, the sum total of the situation is that, out of the three contracts afore, two, namely Exts.P7 and P8 - produced along with WP(C)No.10564/2023, have not been completed, which his client asserts is not for any reason

¶44

that can be attributable to them; while, the third one, namely Ext.P14 - produced therein, has been finally completed. He argued that, however, since Ext.P35 order of termination of the contract at the risk and cost of his client - produced along with WP(C) 10654/2023 - had been issued, but without affording any opportunity of being heard to them, this is a fit case where this Court must intervene and set aside the same, so that his client can

¶45

then be paid the eligible amounts under the contracts.

¶46

¶47

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶48

In response, Sri.Raju Joseph - learned Senior Counsel,

¶49

instructed by Sri.S.Nirmal – learned Standing Counsel for the KSEB, pointed out that the petitioner has not impelled any complaint against the purchase orders – produced as Exts.P4 and P5 in WP(C)No.5276/2023 and as Exts.P7 and P8 in WP(C)No.10564/2023; and asserted that only a small portion of the quantity of the coils had been supplied by them and therefore, that the ‘KSEB’ had no other option, but to resolve - through Ext.P31, produced along with WP(C)No.5276/2023 – to foreclose the orders and terminate the contract at their risk and cost. He submitted that this was finally communicated to the petitioner through Ext.P53 letter dated 20.12.2022, produced in WP(C)No.5276/2023; and that it is only as a consequence thereof,that further proceedings dated 09.03.2023 – produced as Ext.P35 WP(C)No.10564/2023 – had been issued, quantifying the risk and cost of the petitioner.

¶50

6 . However, adverting to the specific submissions of Sri.Jaju Babu as afore, this Court put a pointed question to Sri.Raju Joseph – learned Senior Counsel, whether Ext.P31 in WP(C)No.5276/2023 and Ext.P35 in WP(C)No.10564/2023 had been issued, after hearing

¶51

¶52

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶53

the petitioner. The learned Senior Counsel admitted that it was not,

¶54

but argued that it was unnecessary because, as evident from Ext.P31, the ‘KSEB’ had resolved to terminate the contract and foreclose the purchase orders at the risk and cost of the petitioner, since they did not even respond to various communications issued to them; and because they took no steps to complete the contract awarded to them. He thus vehemently argued that Ext.P53 in WP(C)No.5276/2023 was only a consequence of Ext.P31 in WP(C)No.10564/2023; while, Ext.P35 in the latter is only a quantification of amounts, both of which did not require a hearing to be afforded to the petitioner.

¶55

7 . I am afraid that I cannot find favour with the afore

¶56

submissions of the learned Senior Counsel because, when drastic consequences are cast upon the petitioner, on account of the foreclosure of contracts and imposition of risk and costs, certainly,

¶57

they ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard. This is not to mean that the KSEB was in error in having issued Ext.P 31 in WP(C)No.5276/2023, because if its contents are true, this appears

¶58

to be a case where the petitioner did not respond in the manner

¶59

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶60

¶61

they were expected to. However, when the contract was terminated

¶62

and foreclosed, with a proposal to fix risk and costs against them, any consequential action – including Ext.P53 in WP(C)No.10564/2023 – could have been issued only after affording them an opportunity of being heard. I say so because, Ext.P31 in WP(C)No.5276/2023 is a resolution adopted by the KSEB which, as I have already said, possibly could have been taken without hearing the petitioner; but when Ext.P53 order was consequently issued, they certainly ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard.

¶63

8 . In the afore perspective, it is without doubt that Ext.P 35 in WP(C)No.10564/2023 also is vitiated for the reason that the petitioner was not heard. In this regard, the situation is exacerbated because, when a risk and cost quantification is done, obviously, the objections of the petitioner ought to have been taken into account and their version recorded, before they could have mulcted with any detriment. This is the primary sine qua non for a fair procedure adopted by the KSEB – which ought to act as a model, being in the public sector.

¶64

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶65

¶66

In the afore perspective and solely for the reasons above,

¶67

without entering into the merits of any of the rival contentions, I order these Writ Petitions in the following manner:

¶68

a ) WP(C)No.5276/2023 is allowed to the limited extent of directing the competent Authority to hear the petitioner before Ext.P53 order is put into effect; however, clarifying that this is only with respect to the quantification of risk and cost against them and . not against the foreclosure or termination of contract per se

¶69

b ) WP(C)No.10564/2023 is allowed and Ext.P35 therein is

¶70

quashed; with a consequential direction to the competent Authority of the KSEB to reconsider the quantification of risk and cost against the petitioner, subject to the decision in (a) above, after affording them necessary opportunity of being heard.

¶71

c ) The afore two directions shall be abided by the competent

¶72

Authority of the KSEB simultaneously with a common hearing granted on both issues; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶73

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶74

¶75

d ) It also goes without saying that depending upon the afore

¶76

exercise and subject to the decision to be taken, all eligible bills of

¶77

the petitioner, if any, shall be disbursed to them within a period of

¶78

one month thereafter.

¶79

Sd/-

¶80

SAS/RR

¶81

 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶82

JUDGE

¶83

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶84

¶85

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10564/2023

¶86

`PETITIO`	`NER EXHI`	`BITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE UDYAM REGISTRATION` `CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE PAST` `EXPERIENCE OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE` `PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 24.07.2013` `ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT` `BOARD`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES THE TENDER` `NOTIFICATION DATED 22-12-2020`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`A TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES THE TENDER` `NOTIFICATION 21.12.2020`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE BID` `LETTER DATED 09-01-2021`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED` `09.08.2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED` `06.09.2021 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER (FTD)` `NO.869/2021(XH-AE/SCM.54/2021-22/6 SQ.MM` `WP/BHADORA) DATED, 20.11.2021`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`TRUE COPY OF BOARD ORDER (FTD)` `NO.877/2021(XH-AE/SCM.58/2021-22/2.5 SQ.MM` `WP/BHADORA) DATED 22.11.2021`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED PURCHASE ORDER` `NO. SCM- 54/2021-22 /3117 DATED 24.11.2021` `FOR EXHIBITS P4 AND P5 TENDER` `NOTIFICATIONS`
`Exhibit`	`P12`	`TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED PURCHASE ORDER` `DATED 06-09-2021 FOR PO NO. SCM- 58/2021-` `22 /4365 DATED 24.11.2021 FOR EXHIBITS P4` `AND P5 TENDER NOTIFICATIONS`
`Exhibit`	`P13`	`A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 05.03.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO FINANCE AND` `ACCOUNTS MANAGER, KSEB REQUESTING A RATE` `REVISION AND EXTENSION OF DELIVERY` `SCHEDULE`
`Exhibit`	`P14`	`A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 21.03.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO KSEB REQUESTING` `RATE REVISION`
`Exhibit`	`P15`	`A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 22.03.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO KSEB REQUESTING` `RATE REVISION`

¶87

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶88

¶89

`Exhibit P16`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED` `13.04.2022 SENT BY KSEB TO PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P17`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.04.2022 SENT` `BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P18`	`A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.06.2022` `SENT BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P19`	`A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 21.06.2022` `SENT BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P20`	`A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION LETTER DATED` `01.07.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P21`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.07.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF` `MINISTER OF KERALA`
`Exhibit P22`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.09.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF` `MINISTER OF KERALA`
`Exhibit P23`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 15.09.2022 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P24`	`TRUE COPY OF INSPECTION CALL LETTER DATED` `20.09.2022 SENT BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P25`	`TRUE COPY OF INSPECTION CALL LETTER DATED` `04.10.2022 SENT BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P26`	`TRUE COPY OF REQUEST LETTER DATED` `10.11.2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P27`	`TRUE COPIES OF LETTERS DATED 23.11.2022`
`Exhibit P28`	`TRUE COPIES OF LETTER DATED 01.12.2022`
`Exhibit P29`	`TRUE COPIES OF LETTER DATED 03.12.2022`
`Exhibit P30`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `B.O(DB)NO.937/2022CE(SCM)/XH-AEI/2022-` `23/2.5SQMM/WP/ BHADODRA DATED 03.12.2022` `PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P31`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY THE RESPONDENT` `TO THE PETITIONER INTIMATING SHORT CLOSE` `ORDER DATED 20.12.2022`
`Exhibit P32`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.01.2023` `BEARING NO. XH-AE1/SCM.58/2021-22/2.5` `SQ.MM WP/BHADORA/7553 ISSUED BY THE` `RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P33`	`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED` `17.02.2023 IN WP(C) NO. 5276 OF 2023`
`Exhibit P34`	`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM REPORT DATED` `28.02.2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P35`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER` `NO-XH-AE.1/SCM.58/2021-22/2.5SQMM/BHADORA` `DATED 09.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE FIRST` `RESPONDENT`

¶90

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶91

¶92

Exhibit P36A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.03.2023
ISSUED BY KSEB TO HDFC BANK
Exhibit P37A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.03.2023
ISSUED BY HDFC BANK TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P38A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM
NO.F.1/1/2023-PPD ISSUED BY THE
PROCUREMENT POLICY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF
EXPENDITURE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 06-02-2023
Exhibit P39TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
14.03.2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W P©
5276 OF 2023
Exhibit P40TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED
18.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶93

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶94

¶95

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5276/2023

¶96

`PETITIO` `Exhibit`	`NER EXHIBITS` `P1`	`TRUE COPY OF TENDER NOTIFICATION DATED 22-` `12-2020 RELEVANT PAGES OF EXT P1`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`TRUE COPY OF TENDER NOTIFICATION DATED 21-` `12-2020 RELEVANT PAGES OF EXT P2`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`TRUE COPY OF BID LETTER DATED 09-01-2021` `WITH RELEVANT PAGES`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED` `09.08.2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED 06-` `09-2021`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF` `CONTRACT AND SCHEDULE FOR THE SUPPLY OF` `MATERIALS`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 09.09.2021 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 11.09.2021 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 15.09.2021 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER WITH RELEVANT PAGES`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER (FTD)` `NO.869/2021(XH-AE/SCM.54/2021-22/6 SQ.MM` `WP/BHADORA) DATED, 20.11.2021`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`TRUE COPY OF BOARD ORDER (FTD)` `NO.877/2021(XH-AE/SCM.58/2021-22/2.5 SQ.MM` `WP/BHADORA) DATED 22.11.2021`
`Exhibit`	`P12`	`TRUE COPIES OF THE AMENDED PURCHASE ORDER` `DATED 24.11.2021 FOR EXHIBITS P1 AND P2` `TENDER NOTIFICATIONS`
`Exhibit`	`P13`	`TRUE COPIES OF THE AMENDED PURCHASE ORDER` `DATED 24.11.2021 FOR EXHIBITS P1 AND P2` `TENDER NOTIFICATIONS`
`Exhibit`	`P14`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 05.03.2022 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER TO FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS` `MANAGER, KSEB REQUESTING RATE REVISION AND` `EXTENSION OF DELIVERY SCHEDULE`
`Exhibit`	`P15`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 21.03.2022 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER TO KSEB REQUESTING RATE` `REVISION`
`Exhibit`	`P16`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 22.03.2022 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER TO KSEB REQUESTING RATE` `REVISION`
`Exhibit`	`P17`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED` `13.04.2022 SENT BY KSEB TO PETITIONER`

¶97

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶98

¶99

`Exhibit P18`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.04.2022 SENT` `BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P19`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.06.2022 SENT` `BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P20`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 21.06.2022 SENT` `BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P21`	`TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED` `01.07.2022 MADE BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P22`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.07.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF` `MINISTER OF KERALA`
`Exhibit P23`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.09.2022` `SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF` `MINISTER OF KERALA`
`Exhibit P24`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 15.09.2022 SENT` `BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P25`	`TRUE COPY OF INSPECTION CALL LETTER DATED` `20.09.2022 SENT BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P26`	`TRUE COPY OF INSPECTION CALL LETTER DATED` `04.10.2022 SENT BY PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P27`	`TRUE COPY OF REQUEST LETTER DATED` `10.11.2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P28`	`TRUE COPIES OF LETTERS DATED 23.11.2022`
`Exhibit P29`	`TRUE COPIES OF LETTER DATED 01.12.2022`
`Exhibit P30`	`TRUE COPIES OF LETTER DATED 03.12.2022`
`Exhibit P31`	`TRUE COPY OF THE B.O (DB) NO. 937/2022` `CE(SCM)/XH-AEI/2022-23/2.5SQ MM` `WP/BHADODRA DATED 03.12.2022 PASSED BY THE` `RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P32`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.01.2023` `BEARING NO. XH-AE1/SCM.58/2021-22/2.5` `SQ.MM WP/BHADORA/7553 ISSUED BY THE` `RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P33`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY RESPONDENT TO` `PETITIONER DATED 29.10.2021`
`Exhibit P34`	`TRUE COPY OF REPLY SENT BY PETITIONER TO` `EXT P33 LETTER DATED 02.11.2021`
`Exhibit P35`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF RESPONDENT TO` `DEPUTY ENGINEER, ELECTRIC CIRCLE, KOLLAM` `DATED 03.11.2021`
`Exhibit P36`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY RESPONDENT TO` `PETITIONER DATED 09.11.2021`
`Exhibit P37`	`TRUE COPY OF REPLY SENT BY PETITIONER TO` `EXT P36 LETTER DATED 10.11.2021`
`Exhibit P38`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTERS OF RESPONDENT TO`
	`DEPUTY ENGINEER, ELECTRIC CIRCLE, DATED`

¶100

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶101

¶102

	`12.11.2021`
`Exhibit P39`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY PETITIONER TO` `DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KOLLAM 17.11.2021`
`Exhibit P40`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY PETITIONER` `TO CHIEF ENGINEER, SCM DATED 18.11.2021`
`Exhibit P41`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY CHIEF ENGINEER` `SCM TO DY. CHIEF ENGINEER KOLLAM DATED` `27.11.2021`
`Exhibit P42`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY CHIEF` `ENGINEER, SCM TO PETITIONER DATED` `06.01.2022`
`Exhibit P43`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY CHIEF ENGINEER` `SCM TO PETITIONER DATED 11.02.2022`
`Exhibit P44`	`TRUE COPY OF TEST RESULT FROM NIT DATED` `25.01.2022`
`Exhibit P45`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY PETITIONER TO` `CHIEF ENGINEER SCM DATED 07.03.2022`
`Exhibit P46`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY CHIEF ENGINEER` `SCM TO PETITIONER DATED 21.03.2022`
`Exhibit P47`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 22.03.2022 SENT` `BY PETITIONER TO CHIEF ENGINEER SCM`
`Exhibit P48`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY SCM TO` `PETITIONER DATED 12.04.2022`
`Exhibit P49`	`TRUE COPY OF THE TEST REPORT DATED` `24.01.2023 ISSUED BY ELMEF TESTING AND` `CALIBRATION LABORATORIES PVT LTD`
`Exhibit P50`	`TRUE COPY OF THE DATA SHEET DATED` `06.09.2021 BEARING NO. P.O. NO. SCM` `58/2021-22/4365 SHOWING THE DETAILS OF` `DELIVERY OF COILS BY THE PETITIONER TO THE` `RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P51`	`TRUE COPY OF THE CHART SHOWING MATERIALS` `SUPPLIED AND BILLS RAISED BY PETITIONER` `DATED NIL`
`Exhibit P52`	`TRUE COPY OF THE MDCC CERTIFICATE DATED` `05.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P53`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT TO BHADODRA` `INTIMATING SHORT CLOSE ORDER DATED` `20.12.2022`
`Exhibit P54`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER` `NO-XH-AE.1/SCM.58/2021-22/2.5SQMM/BHADORA` `DATED 09.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE FIRST` `RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P55` `RESPONDENT EXHIB`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER SENT BY PETITIONER TO` `1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.03.2023` `ITS`

¶103

WPC 5276/23 & 10564/23

¶104

¶105

Exhibit R1(a)True copy of the relevant page (Page No.5)
of minutes of the meeting of Full Time
Directors

Bhadora Industries Pvt. Limited v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhadora Industries Pvt. Limited v. Kerala State Electricity Board 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

G.Jayakrishnan, S/O.K.Gopinathan Nair Vs State of Kerala

Dhanesh Kumar K.S. Vs State of Kerala

Shajimon George. Vs the Branch Manager South Indian Bank.

Pauline Mary Vs District Collector

Habib Mohamed Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Chicago Constructions International Private Limited Vs Kerala Water Authority