The cancellation of a tender must respect the principles of due process, including the opportunity for the contractor to be heard.

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

" a. To call for the records leading to issuance of Exhibit P7 & Exhibit P8 and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing the above documents and such other documents and decisions taken to cancel the tender process initiated through Exhibit P1 and culminated into awarding the purchase order through Exhibit P3.

b. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 2^nd & 3^rd Respondents to restore Exhibit P3 Purchase order in favour of the Petitioner and to release the quoted amount in advance for completing of the installation of water purifier as stipulated through Exhibit P5 undertaking."

[SIC]

2. The Petitioner is running an MSME unit, and he had participated in an e-tender proceedings of the respondent Panchayat under the Project of ‘Installation of water purifier’ (2024-25), including water connection and electrification. It is the case of the petitioner that he satisfied the technical and financial bid requirements, that the tender was awarded in his favour, and that Ext.P3 purchase order was issued by the 2^nd respondent, the Panchayat. The Petitioner had demonstrated the functioning of the product and had also procured water purifiers and made arrangements for the execution of the electrical-plumbing work for installing the purifiers in the institutions proposed by the 2nd respondent, in which the water purifiers were to be installed. Thereafter, through Ext.P8 resolution was taken by the Panchayat and the same was communicated as per Ext.P7, in which it is stated that the tender was cancelled and decided not to implement in that particular financial year. Aggrieved by the same, this Writ Petition is filed.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel appearing for the Panchayat.

4. This Court perused Exts.P7 and P8. A perusal of Exts.P7 and P8 would not show that any specific reasons are mentioned in Ext.P7 to cancel the contract. Petitioner relied on Rule 4 of the Kerala Panchayat (Contract) Rules, 1996, which is extracted hereunder:

“4. Power of Panchayat to cancel Contracts-

The Panchayat shall be vested with the power to cancel a contract after issuing notice to the Contractor if the Contractor acts in contravention to the terms of the contract and the President shall take steps to recover from the Contractor, the loss that the Panchayat may sustain on this account and the President shall have the sole responsibility in this respect.”

5. It is the case of the petitioner that even without giving an opportunity of hearing, Exts.P7 and P8 are issued. I think there is some force in the argument of the petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that the matter is to be reconsidered by the Panchayat. To facilitate the Panchayat to reconsider the matter, Exts.P7 and P8 can be set aside.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. Exts.P7 and P8 are set aside.

2. The 2^nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-