IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1932 WA.No. 1862 of 2010 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.28884/2010 Dated 29/09/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------- K.SURESH, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN, ROYAL CASTLE, MATHUKKOTH, VARAM P.O., KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD (ROADS) DIVISION, KANNUR-673 121. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, IRITTY-670 703. R1 & R3 BY SRI. C.K. KARUNAKARAN, SC, K.S.E.B. R2 BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K. MEERA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No. 1862 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, C.J. Aggrieved by judgment dated 29th September, 2010 in W.P.(C) No.28884 of 2010 the unsuccessful petitioner therein preferred this writ appeal. 2. The appellant was the successful bidder for execution of a work of laying underground cable from the 110 KV Substation, Iritty to Iritty Town. The said work was required to be completed within a period of three months from the date of execution of the contract. The contract itself was required to be entered into within a period of three days from the date of declaration of the successful tender. For various reasons, the appellant admittedly could not enter into the contract. Therefore the respondents cancelled the decision to award the contract in favour of the appellant and proceeded to re-notify and invite fresh tenders for W.A.No.1862 of 2010 - 2 - execution of the said work. 3. The appellant approached this Court by way of the above mentioned writ petition complaining that the cancellation of the tender proceedings which culminated in his favour without notice to him is arbitrary and illegal. 4. By the judgment under appeal, a learned Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition. Hence this appeal. 5. When the matter is taken up, we are informed that pursuant to the notification inviting fresh tenders dated 16.9.2010 a third party has already been awarded the contract and the third party entered into a written agreement with the respondents. 6. In the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the learned Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition. The appellant if still believes that the cancellation of the contract awarded in his favour earlier is illegal, it is open for him to seek appropriate legal remedy by way of damages or otherwise before W.A.No.1862 of 2010 - 3 - the appropriate forum. we do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal. The writ appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge vns