IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2007 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1928 OP.No. 36167 of 2000(E) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S.NIRAPARA ROLLER FLOUR MILL (P) LTD., INDUSTRIAL NAGAR, CHANGANASSERY, PIN.686106 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI.XAVIER CHACKO AS AUTHORISED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL THOMAS(T) SMT.K.V.RESHMI RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, P.B.NO.2030, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-682035. BY ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. NO.61639/2000 IN O.P. NO.36167/2000 DISMISSED: 14.3.2007 SD/-(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DT.18.9.97. P2: TRUE COPY OF INVITATIN TO TENDER DT.5.10.98. P3: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DT.19.12.98. P4: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT.28.6.97. P5: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DT.23.7.99. P6: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT.7.12.99. P7: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DT.27.10.99. P8: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DT.28.2.2000. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... O.P. No.36167 of 2000 .................................................................... Dated this the 14th day of March, 2007. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging demand of penalty for supply of Atta for ration distribution which contained moisture in excess of prescribed limits. Respondent is a Government of Kerala undertaking with which petitioner had contract for supply of commodities conforming to the standard prescribed. The impugned proceedings clearly show that the materials supplied by the petitioner contained excess moisture for which penalty is levied in accordance with tender conditions. If petitioner disputes allegation of excess moisture content, the matter could be decided only by taking evidence and therefore it cannot be settled in writ proceeding. The O.P. is therefore closed leaving freedom to the petitioner to settle dispute through civil suit or in arbitration, if contract provides for it. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms