IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2009 / 15TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18524 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SRI MEENATCHI AGENCIES, 270B, FIRST FLOOR, SASTHA ARCADE, ADWAITHA ASHRAMAM ROAD, SALEM, TAMIL NADU, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.BALASUBRAMANIAN. BY ADV. SRI.K.SRIKUMAR SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA MINERALA & METALS LIMITED, (A GOVERNMENT OF KERALA UNDERTAKING), SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN (SR.) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No.18524 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner, a registered partnership firm dealing in Petroleum Coke, Lignite, Coal and Coke, responded to Ext.P1 issued by the first respondent seeking suppliers for the said commodity. A purchase order, Ext. P3 was issued and according to the petitioner substantial quantity has been supplied pursuant to Ext.P3. At the instance of the first respondent, the petitioner was compelled to offer a discount of Rs.50/- per metric ton. Nevertheless there is now a reluctance on the part of the first respondent, in placing further orders on the petitioner and hence this writ petition. 2. There is also an allegation that the internal purchase regulations governing the first respondent is being violated. This a matter which shall be gone into by the second respondent. 3. In so far as the contention regarding the first respondent procuring the commodity for which a purchase WPC.No.18524 OF 2009 : 2 : order has already been issued, from other sources are concerned, the remedy of the petitioner would lie either before a Civil Court or before an Arbitrator. But since the first respondent is a Government of Kerala undertaking, if the petitioner moves, the second respondent with a representation pointing out the aspects mentioned in the writ petition, the second respondent shall look into it within two weeks from the date on which the said representation is filed and if any internal purchase regulations otherwise mandates the first respondent to procure any commodity, necessarily only from those persons with whom the purchase orders have been issued for a specific quantity, then it will be open to the second respondent to enforce such regulations. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) jma