IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 149 of 2011()
1. SHIBU ZACHARIAH, S/O.LATE K.V.ZACHARIA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALA BHAVAN,
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA
For Petitioner :SRI.M.A.FIROZ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice B.P.RAY
Dated :02/02/2011
O R D E R
C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &
BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ.
--------------------------------------------
W.A. No. 149 of 2011
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2ndday of January, 2011
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
Heard counsel for the appellant, Government Pleader and
standing counsel appearing for the Kerala Water Authority. After
hearing all sides, what we find is that appellant wants to get the
contract awarded to him with price variation clause. The Water
Authority insisted that appellant should remove the condition on price
variation, if the contract is to be awarded to the appellant. We are in
complete agreement with the view taken by the Water Authority
because if price variation is agreed upon there is bound to be dispute
leading to unnecessary litigation. In other words, the contract if at all
possible should be awarded by fixing the contract price on a fixed basis
whatever be the increase allowed from the PAC. Since appellant was
considered fit and eligible, we feel appellant could be given one more
opportunity to agree for removal of price variation clause and accept
the offer made by the Water Authority. If appellant gives confirmation
2
within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment, the Water Authority will award the contract to the appellant
or otherwise Water Authority is free to retender the same.
W.A. is disposed of as above.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.
(BHABANI PRASAD RAY)
Judge.
kk
3