Patna High Court
M/S Hira Agency vs The Union Of India on 5 March, 2024
Bench: Chief Justice, Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11228 of 2023
======================================================
M/s Hira Agency through its Proprietor Hira Prakash Bhanarkar @ Hira P.
Bhanarkar, aged about 42 years, Gender- Female, Wife of Prakash Bhanarkar,
resident of Plot No. 1063, Binoba Bhave Nagar, Galli No. 30, Dr. Ambedkar
Marg, P.S.- Yashodhara Nagar, District- Nagpur, Maharashtra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Chairman & CEO, Railway Board.
2. The Director, Tourism and Catering, Railway Board, New Delhi.
3. Director, Passenger Marketing, Railway Board, New Delhi.
4. General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.
5. The Principle Chief Commercial Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.
6. Senior Division Commercial Manager, Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.C. to AAG
Mr. Devansh Shankar Singh, J.C. to AAG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 05-03-2024
The petitioner is a catering/vending contractor of the
East Central Railway (for brevity 'ECR') who is aggrieved with
Patna High Court CWJC No.11228 of 2023 dt.05-03-2024
the debarment issued by the ECR, as per Annexure-8. The
petitioner's name is listed at Serial Nos. 6 and 7 of the
impugned order which debars him from participating in the
bidding process of all Railway catering contracts for a period of
five years.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner had been issued with six contracts where he was the
successful bidder for operating the General Minor Units (for
brevity 'GMU') being the catering stalls providing food and
beverages services to the Railway passengers. The general
instructions issued by the Railways as Catering Policy, 2017
itself provided that not more than five catering stalls shall be
awarded. The petitioner submitted a representation to cancel one
of his catering contracts. He was allotted with four and he had
submitted the agreements and paid the necessary amounts for
two. He was awaiting the cancellation of one of the contracts
and the allotment of the 5th GMU which had led to the delay.
The petitioner also contends that the delay in remittance was
due to pandemic.
3. Learned Standing Counsel for the Railways,
however, asserts that the pandemic was in the year 2020 far after
the date of remittance. The petitioner could not have waited for
Patna High Court CWJC No.11228 of 2023 dt.05-03-2024
the cancellation of one GMU or for the allotment of the 5 th
GMU, since with respect to four GMUs he was awarded
contracts as per the bid. The petitioner was obliged to make the
remittances in time, on failure of which it causes difficulty to
passengers also. The Railways was perfectly within its authority
to debar the petitioner, is the contention taken.
4. The petitioner admittedly applied for operation of
GMUs under the ECR by submitting tenders. He was awarded
tender for running catering stalls at GMUs 15, 30, 33 and 36 at
the Samastipur Railway Station and GMUs 39 and 45 for
providing food and beverages service to the passengers at
Darbhanga Railway Station.
5. The petitioner also admits that he was allotted the
GMU 30 at Samastipur Division on 15.07.2019, GMU 15 at
Samastipur Railway Station on 16.10.2019 and GMU 33 at the
very same Railway Station on 15.07.2019. As far as Darbhanga
Railway Station is concerned, he was allotted GMU 45 by letter
dated 15.07.2019. Despite all the four Letter of Awards (for
brevity 'LOA') having been issued, the petitioner made the
remittances and entered into agreement with respect to only two
LOAs being GMU 15 and GMU 33 at Samastipur Railway
Station.
Patna High Court CWJC No.11228 of 2023 dt.05-03-2024
6. The reason stated by the petitioner for not having
entered into the agreement as per the other two LOAs and
making remittances are not justified. The LOAs were issued in
the year 2019, almost at the same time; with respect to two of
them the petitioner had entered agreements and also made
remittances and hence he cannot contend that the remittances
with respect to the other two were not made for reason of the
pandemic. The pandemic also had not commenced at that point.
7. Further contention raised is that he was waiting for
the cancellation of the 6th GMU and allotment of the 5th GMU.
When four allotments were made to the petitioner which was
within the limit prescribed even as per the catering policy of the
Railways, he could not have raised such a contention to wriggle
out of his responsibility in entering into an agreement for all the
four LOAs.
8. The impugned order indicates that despite issuance
of the LOA, the petitioner failed to deposit the annual licence
fees with GST and the guarantee amount offered which had to
be remitted and agreement executed within seven days. The
debarment was issued as a consequence of cancellation of LOAs
for reason of the petitioner having not complied with the
conditions of the tender, with respect to the catering stalls GMU
Patna High Court CWJC No.11228 of 2023 dt.05-03-2024
30 at Samastipur Station and GMU 45 at Darbhanga.
9. We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the
order passed and we reject the writ petition.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
(Harish Kumar, J)
P.K.P./-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 11.03.2024
Transmission Date
