IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 14835 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BHAVANA TRADING COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,RAGESH METHA, AGED 39, S/O. KALIDASA METHA, BASEMENT SHOP NO.17 VIJAY CHAMBERS, OPPOSITE DREAM LAND CINEMA,1140 THRIBHUVANDAS ROAD, GRANT ROAD (EAST) MUMBAI 400 004. BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE KAKKATTUMATTATHIL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023 SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.14835/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF TENDER NOTIFICATION NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 30.11.09. EXT.P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF TENDER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 29.12.2009. EXT.P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF PURCHASE ORDER NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 19.3.10 EXT.P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 28.5.2010. EXT.P5: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 27.10.10. EXT.P6: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 24.11.2010. EXT.P7: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DT 14.2.2011. EXT.P8: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 25.3.2011. EXT.P9: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPLY LETTER DT 1.4.2011. EXT.P10: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO.SRBI/027802/99/BB DT 19.04.2011 EXT.P11: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF DEMAND NOTICE NO.SRBI/027802/09/BB DT 12.5.2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 14835 OF 2011 (D) ===================== Dated this the 24th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the standing counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Ext.P1 is a tender notice published by the respondent inviting tenders for the supply of aluminium products. Petitioner responded to Ext.P1 and their tenders were accepted. By Exts.P4 to P6, price for the goods to be supplied was also agreed between the parties. According to the petitioner, in terms of the tender conditions, they furnished a bank guarantee and security deposit was also made. Supply was made and for the goods supplied, payments were also received by the petitioner. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that subsequent to the acceptance of the supply and the payments made, respondent issued Exts.P8, P10 and P11 proceedings stating that the rates specified by the petitioner were in excess of the market rates and therefore the alleged excess rate should be repaid by the petitioner. Petitioner was also threatened that if repayment is not made as above, the alleged excess amount will be WPC No. 14835/11 :2 : appropriated from the security deposit and the bank guarantee still retained by the respondent. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this court seeking to quash Exts.P8 to P11. 4. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submits that Exts.P8, P10 and P11 reflect only a proposal made by the KSRTC and that a final decision in the matter has not been taken. 5. I have considered the submissions made. 6. In the facts as noticed above, a final decision saddling financial liability on the petitioner can be taken only after putting the petitioner on notice and after considering the petitioner's explanation and affording an opportunity to the petitioner to make the representations in the matter. This has not been done. 7. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- (1) That Exts.P8, P10 and P11 will be treated as proposals and it will be open to the petitioner to file their objections in the matter to the respondent. This the petitioner shall do within 4 weeks from today. WPC No. 14835/11 :3 : (2) Once the objections are filed as above, respondent will issue notice to the petitioner, afford them an opportunity of hearing and thereafter a final decision in accordance with the contract terms will be taken. (4) It is directed that until the aforesaid process is completed, status quo as on date will be maintained. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp