IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 30728 of 2009(I)
1. C.S.SWAMINATHAN, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... 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 :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :03/11/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J
.......................
W.P.(C).30728/2009
.......................
Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2009
JUDGMENT
By Ext.P1 tender notice dated 12.6.2009, the 6th
respondent invited tenders from registered ‘A’ class
contractors. As per the tender notice, the petitioner submitted
Pre-qualification bid and price bid. In paragraph 9.4 of the
tender conditions it is stipulated that incomplete applications
are liable to be rejected. In paragraph 9.14 (g) it is stipulated
that the profit and loss statements, balance sheets and auditor’s
report for the past five years should be produced along with the
estimated financial projection for the next two years. The
petitioner submitted the profit and loss statements and
balance sheets for only three years. On that ground, he was
disqualified. The petitioner contends, relying on the proforma
in schedule B to the pre-qualification application that only
three years’ profit and loss statements have to be produced.
He contends that in such circumstances, the decision to
disqualify him is arbitrary and is intended to favour the sole
person who was pre-qualified.
2. I have considered the submission made at the Bar by the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned
W.P.(C).30728/09
2
Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.
Paragraph 9.14(g) of Ext.P2 tender conditions reads as
follows:-
“Reports on the financial standing of the
tenderer of such party to a joint ventures
including profit and loss statements balance
sheets and auditor’s for the past five years, on
estimated financial projection for the next two
years and on authority from the tenderer (or
authorized representative of a joint venture) to
seek reference from the tenderers bankers.”
3. Paragraph 9.4 reads as follows:-
“Incomplete offers are liable to be rejected.”
4. Though in Schedule B Financial Statement in the Pre-
qualification application against item No.3 reference is only to
the audited balance sheets and profit and loss statement for
the past three years, it is evident from column 5 thereof that
the bidder is bound to furnish details of the works executed
by him for the past five years. In the light of the stipulation in
paragraph 9.14(g) and even in Schedule B appended to the
W.P.(C).30728/09
3
Pre-qualification application, I am of the opinion that the
petitioner who did not furnish the profit and loss statement
and audited balance sheets for the past five years, was liable
to be disqualified. The petitioner’s tender, which did not
satisfy the tender conditions, was, in my opinion, liable to be
rejected. I therefore, find no merit in the contention raised by
the learned counsel for the petitioner that even if his tender
was defective, he ought to have been afforded an opportunity
to cure the defect.
I accordingly hold that there is no merit in the writ
petition. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
P.N.RAVINDRAN,
Judge
mrcs