IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17570 of 2011(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER ------------------- RENJITH KRISHNAN, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. M.RADHAKRISHNAN, AKG NAGAR, WEST YAKKARA, PALAKKAD,PIN-678 001. BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. MALABAR CEMENTS LTD., WALAYAR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 624, REP.BY MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MALABAR CEMENTS, PALAKKAD-678 624. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, MALABAR CEMENTS, PALAKKAD-678 624. R1 TO R3 BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.K.ANAND SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17570 of 2011(U) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX -------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT ------------------------------------ EXT.P1. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF TENDER SCHEDULE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE SALE ORDER OF THE TENDER DT. 8.1.2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 24.03.2010 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4. COPY F THE LETTER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT. 31.3.2010 EXT.P5. COPY F THE LETTERS TO THE MINISTER DT. 10.04.2010 & 25.3.2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------------- / TRUE CPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.17570 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner in response to tender notice published by the respondents, he submitted Ext.P1 tender. Subsequently, Ext.P2 sale order dtd.8.1.2010 was issued, accepting the offer of the petitioner regarding eight items of materials mentioned therein. He lifted those goods. In this writ petition his grievance is that for item No.6 in Ext.P1 also he was the highest bidder and that sale order has not been issued concerning the said item. It is with this grievance the writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to accept his tender and issue the aforesaid material mentioned in Ext.P1. 2. The petitioner is only a tenderer. Even if it is assumed that he was the highest tenderer, he has no right to compel the awarder to accept his tender and sell the goods to him. Therefore, when the sale order was issued accepting the tender, if any item was excluded, the W.P(C) No.17570 of 2011 2 petitioner has no legally enforceable right to seek a writ of mandamus to compel the awarder to sell him any particular material. In that view of the matter the prayer of the petitioner to compel the respondents to issue sale order concerning item No.6 of Ext.P1 is only to be rejected. 3. Although there is no such prayer in this writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earnest money deposited by the petitioner is still not released to him. In the absence of necessary pleading or such a prayer, this Court will not be justified in directing the respondents to refund any amount. However, if there is any grievance with regard to any such deposit, it will be open to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the appropriate authority, in which event the same will be dealt with appropriately. This Writ Petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE