IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9615 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- B.SURESH,POOMALLI VEEDU,KARAVAROM.P.O, KALLAMBALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,DISTRICT PANCHAYAT,PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PANCHAYATH,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R2 SRI.SAIJO HASSAN FOR R2 SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI FOR R2 SRI.RAFEEK. V.K. FOR R2 GOVT.PLEADER SHRI M.A.ASIF THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.9615/10 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE QUOTATIN SCHEDULE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITONER DATED 6.1.2010. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.1.2010. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.HD/EE/LSGD DATED 19.3.10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN DESABHIMANI DAILY DATED 21.3.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE QUOTATION NOTICE DATED 30.12.09 PUBLISHED IN DESABHIMANI DAILY DATED 31.12.2009. EXT.R2(B): TRUE COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING OF THE PETITIONER DATED 19.3.2010. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.9615 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF MARCH, 2010 J U D G M E N T The Writ Petition is filed challenging Exhibit P3 notification issued by the 3rd respondent inviting tenders for removal mud from the Aruvikkara Reservoir. The petitioner contended that going by Exhibit P1 and P2, he is entitled to remove them in the light of the tender submitted, without any stipulation regarding the quantity. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, the tender notification has been produced as Exhibit R2(a), which shows that the petitioner was given the tender for an equivalent quantity of 3500 M3 and there is an undertaking also in Exhibit R2(b) regarding the same. 3. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed. But, the petitioner also will be eligible to participate in the tender. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE dsn