AMBILI B. Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner claims to be a PWD Contractor. Initially, Ext.P3 order was passed blacklisting the Petitioner. That was challenged before this Court, which resulted in Ext.P4 judgment. Ext.P3 order was set aside on the ground that the order was passed without issuing notice to the Petitioner and the Respondents were directed to pass fresh orders in the matter with notice to the Petitioner. Petitioner submits that, so far fresh proceedings have not been initiated and that his registration as a contractor remains valid. It is stated that, meanwhile tenders were invited by the 4th Respondent and when the Petitioner attempted to submit his tender, that is refused to be accepted on the ground that proposal for blacklisting is pending. It is aggrieved by the above, the writ petition is filed.

(2.) If as stated by the Petitioner, no order of blacklisting has been issued, Petitioner's registration as contractor remains valid and he is entitled to participate in the tender. Therefore, I direct that, if order of blacklisting pursuant to the judgment referred to above has not been passed and if the Petitioner is otherwise qualified, it will be open to the Petitioner to submit his tender to the 4th Respondent, in which event, such tender will also be considered in accordance with law.

(3.) Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 4th Respondent for compliance.