High Court Kerala High Court

All Kerala Engineers And Skilled … vs State Of Kerala on 21 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
All Kerala Engineers And Skilled … vs State Of Kerala on 21 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1549 of 2009()


1. ALL KERALA ENGINEERS AND SKILLED WORKERS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT,

3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.J.CHELAMESWAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :21/01/2011

 O R D E R
             J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J.
                         ------------------------------------------
                              W.A. No. 1549 of 2009
                         ------------------------------------------
                     Dated this the 21st day of January, 2011

                                    JUDGMENT

Ramachandra Menon, J.

The petitioner who lost the battle in the writ petition is the

appellant before this Court. The issue pertains to the scope of Ext.P1

Government Order, wherein certain exemption has been provided with

regard to the satisfaction of Fixed Deposit, Earnest Money Deposit, etc. in

the tenders to be submitted by the societies like the petitioner herein.

2. The grievance of the appellant before this Court was against

the demand for furnishing bank guarantee to an extent of ‘ten percent’ of the

bid amount. After considering the facts and figures and also the relevant

clause in Ext.P1 Government Order, the learned Single Judge of this Court

observed that the liability to furnish bank guarantee as above was something

different from the stipulation regarding Security Deposit and the Earnest

Money Deposit and hence no interference was warranted. Accordingly, the

writ petition was dismissed, which is sought to be challenged before this

Court in the writ appeal.

3. When the matter came up for consideration before the Court

earlier on 28th August, 2009 the following interim order was passed:

“The appellant submits that an amount of Rs.40,00,000/- is

due to be paid by the Inland Navigation Directorate under the Water

W.A.No.1549 of 2009

– 2 –

Resources Department, Government of Kerala in respect of the

work of dredging of Parvathy Puthra river from Kovalam to

Arakulam. If that be so, it will be open to the respondents to

withhold and retain the required amount of security deposited

from out of the amounts payable to the appellant and referred to

above. If no such amount is payable to the appellant, that fact

shall be intimated to the appellant within three days and in

which case the appellant shall execute a bank guarantee within

another one week, subject to the result of the appeal. It is also

made clear that in case there is no sufficient amount payable to

the appellant, that factor also will be intimated to the appellant

and the appellant will furnish bank guarantee for the required

amount after adjusting the amount actually payable to the

appellant.”

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

matter has already been brought to the consideration of the Government

as to the interpretation and scope of Ext.P1 Government Order and that

the appellant would be satisfied if appropriate directions are issued to

the Government to consider the matter and pass final orders after

giving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard in this regard.

5. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing on

behalf of the respondents submits that the respondents have no

objection whatsoever in this regard.

6. In the above circumstances, the appellant is permitted to

make a detailed representation pointing out the facts and figures to the

first respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment, on which event, the first respondent shall consider the

same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after

W.A.No.1549 of 2009

– 3 –

affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. Final orders as

above shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within

three months from the date of receipt of the representation as aforesaid.

It is made clear that we have not considered the merits involved and it

is left open to be considered and decided by the Government,

untrammelled by the observations in the impugned judgment.

Writ appeal is disposed of as above.

J.Chelameswar,
Chief Justice

P.R.Ramachandra Menon,
Judge

vns