IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 29134 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- GAISHU SUNIL, AGED 33 YEARS, W/O.SUNIL, PROPRIETOR OF VARNAM TRAVELS, 'ADWAITHAM, PAMPURAM, KALLUVATHUKKAL.P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M/S.BHARATH PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS THE REGIONAL LPG MANAGER, SOUTHERN REGION, RENGANATHAN GARDENS, 11TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGARI-40, TAMIL NADU. 2. THE TERRITORY MANAGER (LPG), BHARATH PETROLEUM CORPORATION, KOCHI TERITORY OFFICE, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-02. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, S.C, B.P.C SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.V.J.ANAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.29134/2009-J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 19th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein submitted tender for transportation of L.P.G from the bottling plant at Kochi for a period of two years from 01/09/2009. The petitioner had offered four packed L.P.G trucks for the said operation. It is the case of the petitioner that she received a letter dated 26/08/2009 from the first respondent asking her to attend the direct negotiation scheduled to be held on 28/08/2009 at 10.30 a.m. But, the letter was received only on the same day, i.e. on 28/08/2009, at 2 p.m. In these circumstances, the petitioner could no participate in the negotiations. She submitted Ext.P2 representation seeking for a further opportunity in the matter or to allot similar works on the basis of the existing rates fixed by them. 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the stand taken in paragraph (4) is that the tenderers were called for negotiation on various dates, namely, 16/07/2009, 29/07/2009, 03/08/2009, 22/08/2009 and 28/08/2009. The petitioner participated only for the negotiation held on 29/07/2009. The tenders were finalised W.P.(C). No.29134/2009 -:2:- on 30/08/2009 pursuant to the negotiation with the tenderers and after opening of the credential bid and price bid. The contracts were finalised and the tenderers have commenced operations. 3. In the light of the above factual situation, this Court may not be justified in directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the tender which is already over. But, what remains is the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P2 to consider her tender if certain works are available which are yet to be allotted to any of the tenderers. Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by accepting her tender no harm will be caused to the existing tenderers, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that without the other tenderers in the party array, this Court may not be justified in passing such an order. Hence, only if any work other than those finalised are available, the request can be considered. There will be a direction to the respondents to consider Ext.P2 representation and if there is any additional work available, the tender submitted by the petitioner will be considered on such terms as may be W.P.(C). No.29134/2009 -:3:- fixed. Appropriate decision will be taken and a reply will be given to the petitioner within a period of one month. The tenders already finalised on 30/08/2009, will not be re-opened. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms