IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 22772 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.R.S. ROADWAYS, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER M.RAHIM, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT TC.31/123, CHACKAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITHAMBERESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, KESAVADASAPURAM, TRIVANDRUM-695004. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, FCI, REGIONAL OFFICE, KESAVADASAPURAM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. SHIHABUDEEN, RAHMATH MANZIL, ATTINKUZHI, KAZHAKUTTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN FOR R3 SRI.N.KRISHNA PRASAD FOR R3 SC S.KARTHIKA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).22772/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 24th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The issue relates to the award of contracts for transportation of food grains from different branches of Food Corporation of India. Petitioner challenges the eligibility of the 3rd respondent. 2. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 1 and 2. Paragraph 4 of the same reads as follows:- The committee again met on 12.8.09 and finalized the technical bid. The committee found that M/s J & B Associates, Kalamassery and M/s.M.R.S.Roadways, Trivandrum, fulfill the eligibility criteria stipulated by NIT. The committee also found that Sri.S.Shihabudeen does not possess the necessary experience as stipulated in the NIT and therefore he was disqualified. 3. I heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the Food Corporation of India. W.P.(C).22772/09 2 4. In view of the fact that the 3rd respondent has not been fully qualified, and in turn petitioner's tender has been treated as eligible, further action may be taken in this regard by the Food Corporation of India. I make it clear that this is without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs