IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38083 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- D. BHANU, S/O. DAMODARAN, GIRIJA BHAVAN, NEENDAKARA.P.O, KOLLAM - 691 582. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.MANU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY FISHERIES AND PORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SOUTH CIRCLE, KAMALESWARAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SOUTH CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DIVISION, ASRAMOM, KOLLAM - 691 001. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DIVISION, KANNUR - 670 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.38083 OF 2010(I) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Government Contractor. On 4.11.2007, a notice, inviting tenders for the work of road from Pookoyikkal Colony Junction to Kodiyil Kayalvaram coming under the Kollam Division of Harbour Engineering Department, was published. When the said notice was published, petitioner submitted an application for the issuance of tender documents. To that application he was issued Ext.P2 reply informing that the Chief Engineer has vide his letter dated 26.11.2010, directed that since the petitioner is an accused in a criminal case involving offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, petitioner shall be excluded from issuing of tender documents. It is stated that therefore the petitioner cannot be issued tender documents. According to the petitioner, to his knowledge, he is not an accused in any crime and that Ext.P2 amounts to blacklisting. It is with this allegation that this writ petition is filed. 2. Taking note of the averments in the writ petition that the petitioner was unaware of any proceedings as mentioned in WPC.No.38083 /2010 :2 : Ext.P2, this court had directed the Government Pleader to obtain instructions from the Chief Engineer. Accordingly, Government Pleader has obtained instructions and submits that in relation to the work executed by the petitioner for Fisheries Harbour at Chiravathur, the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau has registered a case C.C.No.5/2007 and that the petitioner is the 5th accused in that case. It is submitted that accused No.1 to 4 are departmental officers. It is further submitted that in view of the above Government have issued a direction to the Chief Engineer to exclude the petitioner from issuing tender documents till the disposal of the case and that it was in pursuance to the said direction, the Chief Engineer has issued the letter dated 26.11.2010, mentioned in Ext.P2. 3. Now that from the facts disclosed by the Learned Government Pleader, it is evident that the petitioner is an accused in a criminal case, I think that during the pendency of the criminal case, Government is at liberty to exclude the petitioner from awarding contracts. Such a decision taken by the Government cannot be said to be arbitrary or mala fide warranting interference of this court. If that be so, the refusal of WPC.No.38083 /2010 :3 : the respondents to issue tender documents to the petitioner cannot be faulted. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/