Delhi HC Upholds Railways' Decision To Suspend Catering Agency Which Carried LPG Cylinders On Board Trains Despite Directives Against Flame-Based Cooking
In a recent ruling, the Delhi Court has upheld the decision of the Ministry of Railways to keep the empanelment of Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. which provides catering and back-end services to the Indian Railways in abeyance following an incident where the firm was found to have carried LPG cylinders on board trains despite directives against flame-based cooking in pantry cars.The Court...
In a recent ruling, the Delhi Court has upheld the decision of the Ministry of Railways to keep the empanelment of Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. which provides catering and back-end services to the Indian Railways in abeyance following an incident where the firm was found to have carried LPG cylinders on board trains despite directives against flame-based cooking in pantry cars.
The Court noted that this was not the first instance of the petitioner being provided with a rake lacking flameless cooking facilities.
Justice Subramonium Prasad presiding over the case, observed, “The fact that the subject train was running late cannot be an excuse by a seasoned contractor like the Petitioner as it is not uncommon in India that trains get late due to several factors and the contractors who provide catering service to passengers are prepared for any such eventualities and make proper arrangements beforehand for supply of hot cooked food to the passengers. It is pertinent to note that the journey was from 20.11.2022 to 28.11.2022. When the inspection was carried on in Madurai on 24.11.2022, five gas cylinders were seized by the RPF.”
“From 24.11.2022 to 28.11.2022, the Petitioner provided food to the passengers without using LPG cylinders, i.e. the Petitioner made an arrangement after LPG cylinders were taken off the train. The excuse given by the Petitioner that the Petitioner was handed-over the train only at the last moment and without any provision for flameless cooking and, therefore, the Petitioner was not able to make any alternate arrangements, cannot be accepted. The Petitioner carried LPG cylinders only as a cost cutting measure,” Justice Prasad added.
The challenge in the Writ Petition was against an Order dated 16.01.2023 by the Ministry of Railways, keeping the petitioner's empanelment in abeyance for six months and imposing a penalty of Rs.2 lakhs.
The petitioner, engaged in providing back-end services to the Railways, was awarded a tender to provide services for the South India divine "Swadesh Darshan" Train. However, the train's pantry car lacked provisions for flameless cooking, necessitating the use of LPG cylinders. Despite the petitioner's request for an LHV Rake to facilitate better service, the train departed with a delay of 15 hours.
During a surprise inspection, LPG cylinders were seized, leading to a show-cause notice for violating safety instructions. The petitioner justified LPG use due to last-minute handover and the need to fulfil tender obligations. Unsatisfied with the response, the respondents imposed a penalty and suspended the petitioner's empanelment, leading to the present Writ Petition challenging the order.
Considering the evidence before it, the Court noted, “Circulars issued by the Railways are clear in their terms and prohibit flame-based cooking in pantry cars. As correctly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the Respondent, the Petitioner is not a novice. He has been providing services to the Railways since 2019.”
The petitioner's counsel argued leniency towards other service providers using LPG cylinders. In response to this the respondents submitted an action taken report dated 19.02.2024.
Reviewing the report, the Court observed, “The empanelment of the Petitioner and one more enterprise, called TMI Enterprise, have been kept in abeyance since their license was for a single journey and the licenses of three services providers, namely, M/s Rathour Services, M/s Satyam Caterers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Araha Hospitality Private Limited (Formerly know as Jayanta Kumar Ghosh), have been terminated. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to accept the contention of the Petitioner that the Petitioner has been singled out.”
Furthermore, the Court assessed whether the punishment imposed on the Petitioner was proportional to the offense. It emphasized that serious breaches cannot be disregarded, and the severity of the offense is a crucial factor in determining the penalty.
“For a High Court to interfere with the punishment, the punishment must be so disproportionate to the misconduct that the High Court gets compelled to interfere. In the absence of any disproportionality, the High Courts, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, do not sit on the quantum of punishment and tinker with it just because another view is possible,” the Court emphasized.
Consequently, the Court declined to interfere with the decision to suspend the Petitioner's empanelment for catering and backend services to the Indian Railways for six months.
Thus, the writ petition was dismissed.
Case Title: Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. Vs Union Of India & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 575