Gujarat High Court
Niranjanswarup Ratanlal Jain vs Western Railway & on 22 July, 2013
Author: Jayant Patel
Bench: Jayant Patel
NIRANJANSWARUP RATANLAL JAIN....Petitioner(s)V/SWESTERN RAILWAY C/SCA/11563/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11563 of 2013 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11568 of 2013 ============================================================== NIRANJANSWARUP RATANLAL JAIN....Petitioner(s) Versus WESTERN RAILWAY & 2....Respondent(s) ============================================================== Appearance: MR PP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR SP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR SIRAJ R GORI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 3 ============================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED Date : 22/07/2013 ORAL ORDER
(PER :
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL) The petitioner by way of this petition challenges the communication dated 12.6.2013 issued by the railway authority calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount of license fees and to vacate the same by 21.7.2013 (Annexure-D) and the petitioner has also prayed to quash and set aside the tender published by the respondent authority.
We have heard Mr.Majmudar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Gori, learned counsel appearing for the respondent on caveat.
As such on the aspect of tender and the policy formulated by the railway administration, we are not satisfied to the challenge made by the petitioner, since it is essential domain of the administration to put condition for qualification more particularly when no malafide is alleged. However, on the second aspect of calling upon the petitioner to vacate by communication dated 12.6.2013 is concerned, if the matter is examined qua the rights of the petitioner, the petitioner would not have any right to assert to continue to hold the stall since the period has expired, but taking into consideration the interest of the passengers, who are beneficiaries of the facility available at the refreshment center, appropriate care deserves to be taken.
It was submitted by Mr.Majmudar for the petitioner under the instruction of his client that if the petitioner is allowed to continue to run the stall until new party is given contract on regular basis pursuant to the tender, his client shall not claim any additional right or equity.
Whereas, Mr.Gori, learned counsel appearing for the respondents under the instruction of the officer of the Railway, who is present in the Court, states that the Railway administration is also not desirous to see that the stall and the facilities are disrupted until new party is given contract as per the tender. However, submitted that continuation by the petitioner should not create any right or equity in his favour and the undertaking should be given by the petitioner to that effect. In the event the petitioner fails to vacate, Railway administration should be at the liberty to get the possession with the help of the police, if at all required.
Mr.Majmudar for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready to give an undertaking as desired by the Railway administration.
We also find that is the stall is discontinued until alternative arrangement is made, it would create great hardship to the passengers and the beneficiaries of Railway at the particular station.
Hence, it is directed that if the petitioner gives an undertaking within one week from today to the following condition, he shall be allowed to continue until the new party is given contract pursuant to the tender which is referred to in the petition.
The petitioner shall not create any right or equity on account of his continuation of running the stall until new party is given contract pursuant to the tender.
He shall remove all his belonging and vacate the premises of the stall/refreshment centre/room within one week from the intimation so given by the Railway administration.
After the undertaking, the Railway administration shall given one week notice to the petitioner in advance for vacating that the contract is given to the new party as per the tender.
It is observed that in the event the petitioner fails to vacate as per the undertaking given before this Court, Railway administration shall be at the liberty to get the premises vacated with the help of the police force and that too at the cost of the petitioner.
The petition is disposed of accordingly. D.S. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) (Z.K.SAIYED, J.) kks/bjoy Page 4 of 4