JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of April 2021 The petitioner is aggrieved by the cancellation of the award of contract as per Ext.P10 order dated 06.03.2021. It is stated that the tender was invited as per Ext.P2 on 10.12.2020 for construction of a building for Aswas Rental Housing Scheme for Government Medical College at Thrissur. The PAC of the work was shown as Rs.3,12,85,650/- (Rupees Three Crore Twelve Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty only). The petitioner quoted Rs.2,94,76,458/- (Rupees Two Crores Ninety Four Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Eight only) and he was found to be L1 out of the total 5 bidders who were found qualified. Based on that work was awarded to petitioner as per Ext.P7 letter on 23.02.2021 directing him to execute the agreement within 21 days. The petitioner points out that as per Exts.P8 and P8(a) performance guarantee was deposited by way of fixed deposits on 24.02.2021 and stamp papers worth Rs.29,500/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Thousand Five Hundred only) was also remitted before the respondents on 26.02.2021. It was while so Ext.P10 order was passed canceling the work order. In Ext.P10 it was stated that while inviting the e-tenders PAC happened to be shown in it inclusive of 12% GST which is against the conditions of NIT. The Writ Petition was filed at that stage alleging that cancellation after the award of work and after furnishing performance guarantee is illegal and arbitrary.

2. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that actually the PAC was Rs.2,79,33,608/- (Rupees Two Crore Seventy Nine Lakhs Thirty Three Thousand Six Hundred and Eight only) and the amount quoted by the petitioner was 5.52% above the PAC. It is also stated that the Chief Engineer is not competent to award such a work. It is stated that only after the work was awarded to the petitioner, respondents realized the mistake and immediately thereupon the notice was issued. Producing Ext.R1(e) proceedings of Technical Sanction, the respondents have stated that 12% GST was also included while stating the PAC in the NIT as Rs.3,12,85,650/- whereas it should have been Rs.2,79,39,608/- (Rupees Two Crore Seventy Nine Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Eight only). According to the respondents the mistake is liable to be rectified and therefore it was cancelled. It is stated that the Board has also issued a letter to the petitioner inviting for a negotiation in good faith. But the petitioner did not turn up.

3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit stating that there is nothing illegal in awarding the work to the petitioner with the amount quoted by him even though it is inclusive of the GST. The petitioner submits that similar work has already been awarded by the respondents in Ext.P16. Ext.P16 is a selection notice dated 01.10.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent. Ext.P16 also would show that the same is for construction of a building under the Aswas Scheme in Alappuzha Medial College and PAC was Rs.4,16,73,410/- (Rupees Four Crore Sixteen Lakhs Seventy three Thousand Four Hundred and Ten only) and the negotiated rate of 5% above PAC was agreed by the Contractor. That work has been awarded by the Chief Engineer. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P17 letter before the Chief Engineer informing that he is agreeable for carrying out the work for an amount 5% above PAC by reducing the rate Rs.2,93,30,288/- (Rupees Two Crore Ninety Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Eight only) which is less than the original amount quoted by the petitioner based on which the selection notice was issued to him.

4. In the above circumstances, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P17 representation and to pass orders taking note of Ext.P16 also within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. In the meanwhile work shall not be awarded to anybody else and further proceedings shall not be taken pursuant to Ext.P10.

The Writ Petition is dispo