Loading...

C.S.Swaminathan vs State Of Kerala on 26 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
C.S.Swaminathan vs State Of Kerala on 26 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 2670 of 2009()


1. C.S.SWAMINATHAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY,

3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,

4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,

5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,

6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,

7. M.P.JOLLY, MELATH HOUSE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.K.PRADEEPKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.S.R.BANNURMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

 Dated :26/11/2009

 O R D E R
         S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J.
            ------------------------------------------
                    W.A. No.2670 of 2009
            ------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 26th   day of November, 2009

                         JUDGMENT

S.R.Bannurmath, C.J.

Aggrieved by the rejection of the tender of the

appellant disqualifying him for not giving the complete

information as required, he had approached the learned

Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.30728 of 2009 and on

considering the rival contentions, the learned Judge

found that the appellant had failed to produce the

complete necessary materials, especially the profit and

loss statements, balance sheets and auditor’s report as

required under clause 9.14(g)of the tender conditions.

2. The appellant undisputedly had submitted

the profit and loss statements and balance sheets for only

three years and as such rightly the tendering authority as

well as the learned Single Judge, in our view, was

justified in rejecting the challenge of the appellant against

disqualification as the requirement was specifically made

W.A.No.2670 of 2009

– 2 –

for five years. Moreover, as is brought to our notice by the

learned Government Pleader, the tender process has been

completed and the work has already started on 1.11.2009

completing the basic requirements like leveling, earth

work, widening and improvements and supply of metals for

road work.

3. Considering all these aspects, in our view,

there is absolutely no merit in the present case. The writ

appeal is accordingly rejected. However, if the tender

conditions provide for refund of cost of tender documents,

the appellant may approach the concerned authority and if

permissible under the tender conditions, the authority can

consider refund of the entire or part of the said amount.

S.R.Bannurmath,
Chief Justice

A.K. Basheer,
Judge
vns

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information