Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 39207
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J
MATHER PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
KOCHI METRO RAIL LIMITED – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 23736 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: PRAVEEN K. JOY
For the Respondents: P. A AUGUSTINE
Administrative authorities must consider representations by successful bidders in a timely manner without undue delay.
Headnote:(A) Writ Petition - Consideration of representations made by successful bidders for semi-naming rights - Petitioner submitted representations after delays in approval by the respondents regarding branding - The respondents must consider the petitioner's representation and decide in a timely manner. (Paras 1, 4, 8)
(B) Administrative law - The obligation of authorities to take decisions on representations in accordance with law without undue delay - The respondents should not defer actions during the consideration of the petitioner's requests. (Paras 4, 8)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner successful in e-auction for semi-naming rights; faced delays in approval for branding due to delays by respondents - Similar permissions granted to others.
Findings of Court:
Direct respondents to consider petitioner's requests expeditiously and defer any coercive action until a decision is rendered.
Issues: Grievance about delays in approval of branding and legal obligations of the authorities to address the petitioner's representation.
Ratio Decidendi: Court emphasized the necessity for timely decisions by administrative authorities regarding representations made by parties.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner sought branding approvals due to delays. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. delays affected effective date of agreement. (Para 4) |
| 3. respondents' denial of allegations. (Para 5) |
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 27th day of June, 2025 The petitioner states that the respondents have issued an e-tender cum Auction Notice with Tender No.KMRL/ PROC/TENDER/2023-2024/205 dated 09.08.2023 for Licensing of Semi Naming Rights in Town Hall Metro Station. The petitioner is the successful bidder in the e-auction process conducted by the respondents and secured the Semi-Naming rights for Town Hall Metro Station and signed agreement with the respondents. The petitioner remitted ₹34,80,002/- to KMRL as per instructions with GST and other fees, but was not permitted to use Semi Naming Rights of 7- Bill Board in Town Hall Metro Station, due to the delayed process of KMRL.
2. The petitioner states that the petitioner has completed all the legal steps and procedures in this regard. But, the name suggested by the petitioner was not approved by the respondents and the respondents intimated that no symbol can be allowed as part of brand name. Therefore, the petitioner again submitted the same request to the respondents suggesting the name as “Town Hall Mather Square” and also suggested the additional facilities and services mentioned in Ext.P4. Subsequent to Ext.P5, the petitioner has submitted another letter requesting the branding of seven pillars near Town Hall Metro Station, Semi Naming of Town Hall Metro Station Bridge, Semi Naming of Station Entry along with detailed proposal for the approval of the respondents.
3. Similar permissions are granted by the respondents to Eastea in Palarivattom Metro Station. But, the respondents have not granted permission to the petitioner. Pointing out the delay from the part of the respondents, the petitioner issued a detailed letter to the respondents, requesting them to issue correct invoice for remitting the fees for the second year which should be started from 17.07.2025. The respondents have delayed the approval of name suggested by the petitioner. Finally, the proposal from advertising on the pillars was approved only on 17.05.2024. So, the fitment period as per the contract will start only from 17.05.2024. Hence, the second year should be started from 17.07.2025 to 16.07.2026.
4. It is submitted that the agreement was signed on 01.11.2023, but never came into effect on that day. However, the proposal concerning the metro pillar was approved by Kochi Metro only on 17.05.2024. Hence, all these period has to be exempted. Subsequently, the brand confirmation was taken on consideration only on 29.02.2025 and approved on 29.02.2025. Finally, the entire proposal was given a final approval only on 29.02.2025.
5. Standing Counsel representing the respondents resisted the writ petition. The respondents denied all the material allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition. However, it is submitted that as Ext.P15 representation is pending, the same can be considered by the competent authority of the respondents and a decision can be taken in accordance with law.
8. Taking into consideration the grievance raised by the petitioner in Ext.P15, I am of the view that the competent authority shall take a decision thereon expeditiously.
The writ petition is disposed of directing the competent among the respondents to consider Ext.P15 and take appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law, as early as possible and at any rate, within a period of three weeks. Any coercive action, if proposed, shall be deferred till a decision is taken on Ext.P15 as directed above.
Sd/-
