Kerala High Court
Vijayan vs The Chief Engineer on 30 October, 2019
Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 8TH KARTHIKA,
1941
WP(C).No.26830 OF 2019(C)
PETITIONER:
VIJAYAN,
AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, PROPRIETOR,
VIJAYA CONSTRUCTIONS, BHAGYASREE, VILLA,
KALLELIBHAGOM POST, KARUNGAPPALLY,
KOLLAM, PIN - 690 519.
BY ADV. SRI.SEBASTIAN JOSEPH (KURISUMMOOTTIL)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
HARBOUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT,
KAMALESWARAM, MANACAUD POST,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 005.
2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
HARBOUR ENGINEERING DIVISION,
ASRAMAM POST, KOLLAM - 691 002.
SMT. VINITHA GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P. (C) No. 26830 of 2019 2
W.P. (C) No. 26830 of 2019
-----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the proprietor of a Micro and Small Enterprises Unit duly registered with the National Small Industries Corporation (NSIC). The petitioner submitted a bid for undertaking a painting work pursuant to Ext.P7 invitation made by the second respondent. The bid of the petitioner was rejected as the same was not supported by earnest money deposit and tender fee. According to the petitioner, the enterprises of the petitioner being a unit registered with NSIC, he is exempted from the aforesaid payments. It is also the case of the petitioner that the unit of the petitioner is entitled to 15% price preference, and if the said price preference is extended, the petitioner would be the lowest tenderer in the bid process. The petitioner, therefore, challenges in the writ petition, the decision of the second respondent in rejecting the bid submitted by the petitioner. He also seeks directions to the respondents to award the work to him.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on W.P. (C) No. 26830 of 2019 3 instructions, submitted that the rate quoted by the petitioner for the work is Rs.5,70,372/- and the rate quoted by the lowest bidder is Rs.4,92,545/-. It was pointed out that the petitioner would not become the lowest bidder even if he is permitted to participate in the bid and extended the price preference claimed by him.
In so far as the rate quoted by the lowest bidder is Rs.4,92,545/-, the learned Government Pleader is right in contending that the petitioner would not become the lowest bidder even if he is permitted to participate in the bid and extended the price preference claimed by him. The writ petition, in the circumstances, is closed, leaving open the issues.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
YKB W.P. (C) No. 26830 of 2019 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT PURCHASE ENLISTMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NSIC.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE UDYOG AADHAR REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY MSME.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S 'C' CLASS CONTRACTORS REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14/10/2011.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT POLICY FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES ORDER, 2012 DATED 23/3/2012.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.546/2013/FIN.
DATED 07/11/2013.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE INVITING FOR FOR TENDER NO.35/2019-2020/EE/KLM/S DATED 22/8/2019.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER SUMMARY REPORT, REJECTING THE PETITIONER'S TENDER.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE YKB