IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1931 WA.No. 2481 of 2009 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.22290/2009 Dated 02/11/2009 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------- M/S.CEE JEE LUBRICANTS,VI/592, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA,EDAYAR, BINANIPURAM P.O.,ALUVA-683502, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR C.J.ANTO. BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON RESPONDENTS/1st and 3rd RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,TRANSPORT BHAVAN,FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. M/S.INDUSTRIAL ESTERS & CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,PLOT NO.A-10,MIDC INDL.AREA, AMBERNATH DISTRICT,THANE-421 501. R1 BY SRI.JOHNSON P. JOHN, SC, KSRTC R2 BY ADV. SRI. N. JAMES KOSHY THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 2481 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition of the appellant, present appeal is filed. 2. According to the contentions of the writ petitioner/appellant, though he had offered highest bid for lifting waste oil from the depots of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'Corporation'), respondent No.1 herein has illegally rejected his tender without any reasons and awarded the same to respopndent No.2. It is argued that even though for the last many years the appellant is doing the work satisfactorily, it was illegal on the part of respondent No.1 to reject his tender, that too without any reasons. 3. The appellant contends that even learned Single Judge, without considering the aspect properly, has erroneously rejected the writ petition. WA No.2481 of 2009 -:2:- 4. On going through the records and after hearing both sides, it is not much in dispute that petitioner's tender for the previous year had been rejected by the Corporation for the sole reason that he had failed to comply with the tender work accepted, in the sense in not lifting the entire quantity of waste oil within the time limit prescribed and thereby causing loss to it. 5. When the appellant submitted his tender for the present year, the Corporation has rightly rejected the same as it has no guarantee from the appellant as to full and complete performance of the tender work as accepted by him. Noticing this fact, the learned Single Judge was, in our view, justified in holding that the Court normally will not interfere with the tender process unless the reasoning of the Corporation was either mala fide or illegal. Since the rejection of the tender of the appellant is on the ground of previous conduct of non-performance of the previous year, it cannot be said to be mala fide or illegal. While considering this year's tender, it is always open to the Corporation to consider the past record of the appellant and if the tender calling authority has no confidence in the work performance, it is always open for it to reject the same. WA No.2481 of 2009 -:3:- Hence we find that there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge and hence affirming the same, the Writ Appeal is dismissed as devoid of merit. S.R. Bannurmath, Chief Justice. A.K. Basheer, Judge. ttb/vku.