Madras High Court
The Senior Divisional Commercial ... vs S.Nagarajan on 30 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
1.The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager,
Divisional Office, Southern Railway,
Commercial Branch,
Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Divisional Railway Manager,
Southern Railway,
Chennai Division,
Chennai – 600 003. : Appellants
Vs.
S.Nagarajan : Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against
the order dated 26.02.2020 made in W.P.(MD)No.1575 of 2020, on the file
of this Hon'ble Court and allow this Writ Appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/8
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
For Appellants : Mr.V.Radhakrishnan,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.Manohar
For Respondent : Mr.V.Raghavachari
for Mr.S.Ramesh
JUDGMENT
***************
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
By consent of both parties, the appeal itself is taken up for final
disposal.
2.Heard Mr.V.Radhakrishnan, learned Senior Counsel for
Mr.S.Manohar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and
Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned counsel for Mr.S.Ramesh, learned Counsel
appearing for the respondent.
3.The Writ Petition was filed by the respondents seeking for Writ
of Certiorari to quash the proceedings dated 16.11.2019, in respect of
catering stall in Platform Nos.2A & 3 of Chennai, Central Railway Station,
presently known as Puratchi Thalaivar MGR Central Station and
forthwith renew the license for a further period of three years.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
4.At the very outset, we have to point out that the writ petition
filed before the Madurai Bench is not maintainable. This is so because,
no part of the cause of action arises before the jurisdiction of this Court.
Merely because the writ petitioner was residing in Madurai, that cannot
be a reason to entertain the writ petition in the Madurai Bench, since the
license for which renewal was sought for is in Chennai and the authorities
who passed the impugned orders are also at Chennai and the writ
petitioner wanted to carryon the business activities by obtaining renewal
of license at Chennai. Therefore, the Writ Petition was liable to be
dismissed on the said ground.
5.So far as the legal issue is concerned, we need not labour
much to decide the controversy, since the order relied on for allowing the
writ petition, in W.P.(MD)No.2331 of 2018 dated 06.09.2018 has been
reversed by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.1566 of
2018 dated 16.10.2020. The operative portion of the judgment reads as
follows:
“11. It is, therefore, evident that the tenure
of the licence does not result in any automatic renewal
and it is the discretion of the Railways and
correspondingly, the policy containing the terms and
conditions openly declares that renewal will not be a
matter of right. The respondent – petitioner was
therefore bound by the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
12. We find that the learned Single Judge has
completely overlooked these provisions contained in
the terms and conditions governing the licence that
was granted to the respondent - writ petitioner, even
assuming for the sake of argument that the Policy of
2010 continued to be applicable on the facts of the
present case.
13. Apart from this, it cannot be lost sight of
that if the Catering
Policy of 2017, through Commercial Circular No.20 of
2017, has discontinued the practice of any renewal of
licence, then, in that event, it may not be permissible
for this Court to give a direction for renewal of a
licence which even otherwise is not a matter of right
as concluded hereinabove.
14. Therefore, there is no vested right as
rightly contended by the learned counsel for the
appelant – Railways to seek renewal and hence, we
find that the impugned Judgment dated 06.09.2018 is
legally unsustainable.
15. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed
and the Judgment, dated 06.09.2018 in W.P.(MD) No.
2331 of 2018, is set aside. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
6.Furthermore, we note that there is a change in the catering
policy and as on date, the case as projected by the respondent / writ
petitioner cannot be sustained. In fact, in W.P.(MD)No.2331 of 2018, the
contention of the Southern Railway that the 2017 catering policy cannot
be implemented on account of it being superseded by 2010 catering
policy was rejected by the learned Single Bench. However, the said order
was found to be not sustainable and reversed by the Hon'ble First Bench
as above mentioned. However, the writ petitioner seeks for grant of
license and there is no vested right for the writ petitioner to seek for
renewal of license as the very grant itself is covered by the policy
formulated by the Railway Board. Even assuming that there is a
provision for renewal of the license in the policy, that by itself will not
give a vested right because every renewal amounts to a fresh grant and
still, there is a discussion with the licensor to decide as to whether such
renewal should be granted or not.
7.In any event, the relief sought for in the writ petition could not
have been granted. In fact when this Writ Appeal was entertained, the
learned Division Bench had granted an order of stay on 06.10.2020 and
rightly took note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, South Chennai Railways
and others v. S.C.R. Caterers, Dry Fruits, Fruit Juice stalls Welfare
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
Association and another reported in (2016) 3 SCC 582, wherein it
has been held that renewal of license for persons who have got only one
license, a circular was issued. However, the writ petitioner has managed
to secure four licenses, which is a question mark.
8.Thus, for the above reasons, the order passed in the Writ
Petition is not sustainable. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed.
However there shall be no order as to costs.
[T.S.S., J.] & [S.A.I., J.]
29.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
MR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
To
1.The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager,
Divisional Office, Southern Railway,
Commercial Branch,
Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Divisional Railway Manager,
Southern Railway,
Chennai Division,
Chennai – 600 003.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
MR
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.W.A.(MD)No.897 of 2020
30.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
