SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 1469

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 
V.G. ARUN, J.
Building Consultant and Technological Service Co-Operative Society Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
The Thonnakkal Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. - Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 22379 of 2024
Decided On : 19-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : D. Kishore, Meera Gopinath, R. Muraleekrishnan
For the Respondents: P.S. Appu, Jayakumar J.

Eligible price preference for cooperative societies is restricted to government works, affecting the maintainability of disputes under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.

Headnote:(A) Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 - Price preference for Labour Contract Co-operative Societies - Dispute regarding tender award - Petitioner claimed eligibility for price preference based on government orders. Court held that benefits extend only to governmental works and not to petitioner society. (Paras 3, 5)

(B) Alternative remedy under Section 69 - Court determined that the dispute fell within the ambit of agricultural credit society's business and thus should be resolved through arbitration. (Paras 4, 6)

Facts of the case:
The 1st petitioner sought to be awarded a tender based on a request for price preference, amid concerns of the lowest bidder receiving the contract.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that since the petitioner’s objective did not include construction, and the government orders did not extend the claimed benefits, the writ petition could not succeed.

Issues: Whether the 1st petitioner qualifies for price preference and the maintainability of the writ petition given the existence of an alternative remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that although benefits were extended to Labour Contract Co-operative Societies, limitations applied to the specific context of governmental works, invalidating the petitioner's claims.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. co-operative society eligibility under kerala co-operative societies act. (Para 1)
2. eligibility and entitlement to price preference based on classification. (Para 2)
3. interpretation of government orders on tender preferences. (Para 3 , 4)
4. limitations on claims for price preference in tenders. (Para 5)
5. writ petition dismissal. (Para 6)

JUDGMENT :

V.G. ARUN, J.

1. The 1st petitioner is a co-operative society registered and functioning in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The 1st respondent, another co-operative society, had invited tenders for the construction of its head office building and ancillary works as per Ext.P1 tender notification. The 1st petitioner participated in the tender and quoted the second lowest rate and the 3rd respondent the lowest. The difference between the rates quoted by the 1st petitioner and the 3rd respondent was 7.16%. The President of the 1st petitioner Society therefore submitted Ext.P8 letter, requesting to award the work to the 1st petitioner by granting the price preference available to Labour Contract Co-operative Societies. In the absence of any positive response to the request and apprehending that the work will be awarded to the 3rd respondent, the writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“a. To declare that the petitioners are eligible to be awarded the work in furtherance to Exhibit P1 tender notification in the light of Exhibits P2 to P6 Government orders and as the difference between the rates quoted between the 3rd respondent and the petitioners is only 7.16%.

b. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents 1 and 2 to award the work in furtherance to Exhibit P1 tender notification to the petitioners in the light of Exhibits P2 to P6 Government orders.”

2. Heard, Advs. D. Kishore for the petitioners and J. Jayakumar for respondents 1 and 2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on Ext.P2 Government Order to point out that, the Labour Contract Co-operative Societies in the State are entitled to price preference of 10% above the lowest tenderer, in case the lowest tenderer is a private contractor. It is pointed out that the preferences/exemptions granted to Labour Contract Co-operative Societies have been extended to the 1st petitioner as per Ext.P3 Government Order. Attention is also drawn to Ext.P6 Government Order by which the preferences/exemptions are made applicable to the award of tenders by Co-operative Societies also. It is hence contended that in view of Exts.P2, P3 and P6 Government Orders, the tender notified by Ext.P1 ought to have been awarded to the 1st petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the 1st petitioner is a Building Consultant and Technological Service Co-operative Society falling within the miscellaneous category and is therefore not entitled for the benefits available to Labour Contract Co-operative Societies. Even otherwise, Exts.P2 and P3 orders, obtained under political influence, are not applicable to the 1st respondent Society. Moreover, if construction of buildings is one of the objects of the 1st petitioner Society, refusal to award the contract amounts to a dispute touching upon the business of the society, which can be resolved only by resorting to the remedy of arbitration provided under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. It is hence contended that in view of the efficacious alternative remedy, the writ petition should be dismissed as not maintainable.

5. The Bye-law of the 1st petitioner Co-operative Society produced as Ext.R1(d) does not declare construction of buildings as one of its objectives. Even then the Government deemed it fit to extend the benefits available to Labour Contract Co-operative Societies to the 1st petitioner. In this context, it is pertinent to note that as per Ext.P2 Government Order, benefits, including price preference, were grante

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top