Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court - Orders

M/S Sri Sai Logistics vs The Union Of India & Ors on 10 June, 2010

Author: Mridula Mishra

Bench: Mridula Mishra

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CWJC No.9396 of 2010
                             M/S SRI SAI LOGISTICS .
                                        Versus
                          THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS .
                                      -----------

2   10.6.2010

Petitioner's prayer is for a direction to the respondent nos. 1,2 and 3, who are the authorities of the Ministry of Indian Railways and the Members of the Railway Board, for a direction to extend the period of lease parcel van in Train No. 2387/2388 in favour of the petitioner for further two years, which has been refused vide letter No. ECR/CRM/FMS/03/08/03/parcel van leasing/2387.2388 dated 25.2.2010 issued under the signature of Chief Commercial Manager, East Central Railway (Annexure-5).

Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in case of long term lease of three years as per leasing policy in fact it is mandatory to extend the period of lease for further two years but the respondent authorities under the wrong notion relating to 2 clause 4.0 of the freight marketing circular no. 03 of 2010 dated 9.2.2010 have rejected the claim of the petitioner vide Annexure-5, ignoring the subsequent clarification by the respondent Railway Board in its freight marking circular no.06 of 2010 dated 18.3.2010. Petitioner's period of lease has expired on 2.3.2010. He was given extension of three months till 2nd June, 2010.

Petitioner's case is that instead of three months it should have been for two years.

Counsel appearing for the Union of India representing the Indian Railways is directed to file counter affidavit, explaining the reason for not allowing similar relief to the petitioner as it has been in case of other similarly situated persons. The counter affidavit also must explain the relevant provisions under Annexures 4 and 6 to the writ application.

Counsel for the petitioner prays for interim relief and also prays for a direction to the respondents to allow him to work in terms of agreement dated 2.3.2007 during the pendency of the writ application.

The interim prayer made by the petitioner is allowed.

Put up this matter on 28th of June, 2010 within first five cases before the appropriate Bench.

Till then petitioner will continue to work in terms of the agreement dated 2.3.2007.

(Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar