2025:KER:30077 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WA NO.1503 OF 2021 JUDGMENT DATED 9.11.2021 IN WP(C) NO.23212 OF 2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA -------------- APPELLANT/PETITIONER :- B.SUNDARAM, CHAITHANYA, VALLOM, KOTTARAKKARA P.O., KOLLAM – 691 506. BY ADVS. ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL S.SREEDEV CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL V.A.VINOD RONY JOSE HARIKRISHNAN M.S. SUZANNE KURIAN RESPONDENT S/RESPONDENTS :- 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2 KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM-691 583. 3 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA MINERAL AND METALS LIMITED, SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM-691 583. BY ADVS. SRI.V.TEKCHAND, SENIOR G.P. SMT.LATHA ANAND SRI.VISHNU ARIKKATTIL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA No.1503 of 2021 -: 2 :- 2025:KER:30077 JUDGMENT Dated this the 1 st day of April, 2025 Nitin Jamdar, C.J. Heard Mr. Harikrishnan M. S., learned counsel for the Appellant/ Original Petitioner and Mr. Vishnu Arikkattil for Ms. Latha Anand, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. The Appellant/Original Petitioner was blacklisted by the Respondent Authorities for a period of six months. The said period is over by 1 April 2022. The petition filed by the Appellant challenging the order blacklisting him having been dismissed, he filed the present appeal. 3. In the appeal, a detailed interim order came to be passed on 17 November 2021. The Division Bench, by the said interim order, allowed the Appellant to participate provisionally in a subsequent tender and directed that the grant of the tender be considered provisional. We are informed that the Appellant had submitted a tender pursuant to the interim order, however, he was disqualified for reasons other than blacklisting. 4. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that in future there could be some tenders which contains a clause regarding history of blacklisting. However, no such tender from the year 2021 is shown to us in which the Petitioner had lost opportunity. Therefore, as of today, the period of blacklisting is over and nothing has been placed on record to indicate that WA No.1503 of 2021 -: 3 :- 2025:KER:30077 the petitioner intends to participate in a particular tender which includes a clause regarding the history of blacklisting. 5. In these circumstances, we dispose of the appeal. If the Petitioner is debarred solely on the ground of having a history of this particular blacklisting, we permit the Petitioner to seek revival of the appeal. Sd/- NITIN JAMDAR CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- S. MANU JUDGE Jvt/2.4.2025