IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 8932 of 2010(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- B.RATHEESH, ELECTRO-TECH INDUSTRIES, PLOT NO.100, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, KALAMASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.ASP.KURUP SRI.SADCHITH.P.KUR UP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SECRETARY, KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE PROJECT ENGINEER, KOZHIKKODE CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOZHIKKODE. ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPORATION FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.8932/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF TENDER NOTIFICATION DATED 13/01/2010 ISSUED BY R2. P2 : COPY OF TENDER FOR SINGLE TUBE FITTINGS DATED 05/02/2010 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO R3. P3 : COPYH OF TENDER FOR ELECTRICAL SPARES DATED 05/02/2010 GIVEN BY PETITIONER TO R3. P4 : COPY OF COMPARATIVE STATEMENT SHOWING THE RATES OF VARIOUS TENDERERS. P5 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 11/02/2010 ISSUED BY R3 TO THE PETITIONER. P6 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 25/02/2010 GIVEN BY PETTIONER TO R2. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.8932 of 2010 (N) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The 1st respondent issued Ext.P1 tender notice, in response to which the petitioner submitted Exts.P2 & P3 tenders. Along with the tenders, Earnest Money Deposits were made by way of Bank Guarantee. However, the tenders were rejected for the reason that Bank Guarantee was not one specified in the tender notice. It was thereupon that this writ petition has been filed challenging the rejection of the tenders. 2. By order dated 18/03/2010, the writ petition was admitted and this Court directed the respondents to maintain status quo. Today, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the order rejecting the tenders submitted by the petitioner will be recalled, and that the tenders submitted by the petitioner will be considered along with other tenders received, and a fresh decision regarding the award of the work order will be taken by the Corporation. WP(C) No.8932/2010 -2- 3. This submission made by the learned standing counsel for the respondents should redress the grievance of the petitioner. Therefore, I record the submission and direct the Corporation to consider the tenders submitted by the petitioner along with the tenders submitted by other tenderers, and take a fresh decision in the matter. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg