IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 3929 of 2008(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.K. NARAYANANKUTTY, S/O. KRISHNAN EZHUTHASSAN, PROPRIETOR, P.V. ORGANIC FERTILIZERS, THENOOR P.O.,PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE EDATHIRUTHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, P.O. CHENTRAPPINNI, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, EDATHIRUTHY, P.O. CHENTRAPPINNI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE CHENTRAPPINNI SERVICE SAHAKARANA BANK, CHENTRAPPINNI, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE SRI.GEORGY GEORGE SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No. 3929 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner, who is the proprietor of P.V.Organic Fertilizers, an agency authorised by the Government as per Ext.P2 for supply of Organic Fertilizers like groundnut cake,etc is that in gross violation of Ext.P1 quotation notice, the Panchayat has rejected the tender submitted by him in response to Ext.P1 and has accepted the tender submitted by the third respondent, a Service Co-operative Bank. The contention of the petitioner is that the third respondent-Service Co-operative Bank could not by itself have submitted tenders in response to Ext.P1 since the bank is not an authorised Government agency unlike the petitioners. At best, through the third respondent, an authorised agency could have supplied their products, submits counsel. 2. The Panchayat justifies its action by filing a counter affidavit. It is contended that the third respondent bank is the authorised dealer of M/s Kallaparambil Traders who are recognised by the Agricultural Department as per Ext.R1(a) for supplying of WPC.No.3929/08 2 biofertilizers like groundnut cake. The bank found on scrutiny that the quality of the materials supplied by the third respondent who were the authorised dealers of a recognised agency was much superior to the materials supplied by the petitioner. 3. I have heard the submissions of Sri.K.Anand, counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Joice Goerge, counsel for the Panchayat and Sri.Johnson Mathai, counsel for the third respondent bank. Though Sri.K.Anand addressed very strenuous submissions before me on the basis of the various grounds raised in the writ petition, I am of the view that this court will not be justified in interfering with the decision taken by the committee of the Grama Panchayat in awarding collection and distribution of ground nut cake to the third respondent. The said decision has been taken in the best interest of the beneficiary farmers and the objection raised by the petitioner in my opinion is only technical. The third respondent bank, the authorised deader of Kallaparambil Traders who were an agency recognised by the Government had in my opinion the right to supply of organic manure directly to the first respondent Panchayat by submitting tender pursuant to Ext.P1. Writ Petition will stand dismissed. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE WPC.No.3929/08 2 sv.