MUJEEB REHMAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is running a proprietorship concern named B.M. Traders, is before this Court seeking to declare that he is the valid bidder considering the fact that the petitioner alone has submitted Ext.P3 price schedule in the tender strictly following the stipulations in Ext.P2. The petitioner further seeks to declare that Ext.P4 submitted by the 3rd respondent is in patent violation of the tender conditions and therefore the tender submitted by the 3rd respondent cannot be accepted.

(2.) M/s.Kerala State Industrial Enterprises Limited (KSIE) floated Online e-tenders for the disposal of used plant and machinery, building and miscellaneous assets at Trivandrum Air Cargo Terminal. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 e-tender. Tenders were opened on 24/9/2021. The status as published on 24/9/2021, was changed on 13/10/2021. In the said list, the petitioner's bid and the bid of the 3rd respondent were shown qualified whereas other bids were recorded as rejected.

(3.) Ext.P3 is the price schedule submitted by the petitioner and Ext.P4 is that of the 3rd respondent. According to the petitioner, his bid for ?1,54,865.20 was the highest. As far as the 3rd respondent is concerned, the entries in the price schedule did not satisfy the requirements in the tender form. All columns in the price schedule were not filled by the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent did not fill GST Column. Basic rates and total amounts shown by the 3rd respondent were the same. The petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation to the respondents pointing out these defects. But, the respondents did not act on Ext.P6. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court.