IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 9049 OF 2022 PETITIONER:

ASTER TIMBER TRADERS AGED 40 YEARS REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SHAMEENA SUDHEER, AGED 40 YEARS

7/269-E, MUDICKAL PO, VANCHINADU, MUDICKAL, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 547, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 583547 BY ADV K.SANDESH RAJA RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, *DEPARTMENT OF TIMBER DEPOT OFFICE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

PIN - 695001

2 PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (FOREST MANAGEMENT)

FOREST HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014., PIN - 695014

3 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE TIMBER TRADE DIVISION MUDICKAL P.O, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM - 683547.

PIN - 683547

4 TIMBER DEPOT OFFICER OFFICE OF THE CHETTIKULAM TIMBER DEPOT CHETTIKULAM PO, CHALAKUDY THRISSUR - 680 721.

PIN – 680721 ** THE WORDS ‘DEPARTMENT OF TIMBER DEPOT OFFICE’

OCCURRING IN THE THIRD LINE OF THE ADDRESS PORTION OF THE

1ST RESPONDENT IN THE CAUSE TITLE OF THE JUDGMENT DATED

06.04.2022 IN WP© NO.9049 OF 2022 IS DELETED AND SUBSTITUTED WITH THE WORDS ‘FOREST AND WILD LIFE DEPARTMENT’ AS PER ORDER DATED 19.05.2022 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2022 IN W.P.(C) NO.9049 OF 2022 SHRI.T.P.SAJAN, SPL. G.P. (FOREST) R1 TO R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 6^th day of April, 2022 The petitioner, a Proprietary Firm doing the business of trading in Timber, is before this Court seeking to set aside Exts.P6 and P8 and to direct the respondents to repay the `

amount of 6,51,500/- paid by the petitioner towards part value `

of the timber and EMD of 50,000/-, with 12% interest.

2. The petitioner states that in response to a tender notification dated 23.10.2020, the petitioner participated in auction of timbers and successfully bid 8 lots of timbers. The value of timbers had to be paid by 14.06.2021. It was during this period that a lock-down was imposed consequent to the 2^nd wave of Covid-19 pandemic. The lockdown commenced on 08.05.2021 and continued upto 16.06.2021. As the last day for remitting the value of timber fell within the lockdown period, the petitioner could not remit the amount. Though the petitioner subsequently approached the respondents offering to pay the amount, the respondents did not accept the amount stating that the last date is over.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that during the 1^st wave of Covid-19 pandemic when lock- down was declared, the Government issued Ext.P5 Government Order, whereunder extension of time for payment of money and for lifting the timber was granted taking into consideration the total period of lock-down. However, in the case of the petitioner, during the 2^nd wave of Covid-19 pandemic, though the Government issued Ext.P6 Government Oder, time for payment of money was not extended, though the time for lifting the timber was extended.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is highly discriminatory. The petitioner could not remit the amount in time for the sole reason that a lock-down was clamped during the period prescribed for payment of money. The Government cannot take differential attitude to the Contractors who bid during the 1^st wave of Covid-19 pandemic and during the 2^nd wave of Covid-19 pandemic. The contract with the petitioner has been terminated. However, the respondents are not paying the amount already deposited by the petitioner and the EMD. This is highly arbitrary, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Pleader entered appearance and contested the writ petition. The Government Pleader submitted that as per G.O.[Rt]No.20/2021/Forest dated 19.10.2021, two weeks extension was granted for removal of timber only to those bidders, who had already paid the material value and the taxes applicable. The petitioner did not pay the amount in