Karnataka High Court Upholds Railway Policy To Have Base Kitchens Near Stations, Says It's A Policy Decision To Ensure Good Quality & Hygiene
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the 2023 addendum to the Railways Catering Policy of 2017, by which Base Kitchen infrastructure and qualified and skilled manpower to handle food production have to be put in place not only at originating but also at enroute stations for ensuring good quality and hygienic food to passengers on trains.A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed...
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the 2023 addendum to the Railways Catering Policy of 2017, by which Base Kitchen infrastructure and qualified and skilled manpower to handle food production have to be put in place not only at originating but also at enroute stations for ensuring good quality and hygienic food to passengers on trains.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by South Western Catering Contractors Association and others questioning the Commercial Circular notified on 14-11-2023.
The court said “Preparation of food, distribution of food, quality of such preparation and efficiency of such distribution are in the realm of commercial decisions in public interest by the Railways. Therefore, I find no ground to interfere on the submissions qua the distinction and differentiation between food preparation and food distribution. It is for the respondents/Railways to manage its house in the aforesaid circumstances.”
The petitioners had argued that earlier Catering Policy of 2017 was pursuant to a decision of the cabinet, as the Union of India through the Minister for Railways while presenting the Budget had projected a particular policy which was brought into effect. Therefore, any addendum to the said policy should necessarily go before the cabinet however, in the case at hand, the impugned addendum was made by the Minister for Railways and the Railway Board.
It was further contended that the addendum runs completely contrary to the earlier policy as no contractor outside IRCTC was to get involved and now "it is thrown open".
The respondents argued that addendum aims at maintenance of hygiene, responsibility and accountability for the food served in the trains. Further, insofar as Railways is concerned, it was submitted that the Ministry of Railways is where initiation of policies would end. Commercial Circular No.20 of 2017 also made the same journey and addendum through Commercial Circular No.24 of 2023 has travelled the same way up to the Railway Minister.
It was also explained to the court that IRCTC had entered into contracts with other contractors. Those contractors had only certain kitchens and thus hygiene became a big problem in the catering of Railways, as the contractors to whom IRCTC had entrusted food distribution would blame the person who had prepared the food. Therefore, to bring in accountability, certain tweaking was made to the policy as to who should have the base kitchen and from where the food should come. The present food packets have a QR code on it and the moment the QR code is scanned the kitchen from where the food comes can be seen in real time. The hygiene maintained in the kitchen can also be viewed.
The bench on going through the Catering policy, addendum and the statement of objections filed by the railways, said,
“If hygiene, quality of food and accountability is to be brought in, it cannot be said that such policy is illegal and contrary to public interest. Catering contractors are seeking to project their interest over and above what is aforesaid, which is in the realm of public interest. Therefore, the submission of the learned senior counsel Sri Jayakumar S.Patil, that Commercial Circular 24 of 2023 does not serve the purpose, as was necessary in Catering Policy of 20 of 2017, is unacceptable.”
Further it observed that Court cannot enter into the arena of monitoring preparation and distribution of food in the trains as it is purely the dominion of Railways. “The petition seeks this Court to enter into such an area, which this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, would be 'loathe to even peep into'.”
Noting that no right of the petitioner is taken away, as it is the averment in the statement of objections that the existing tenderers or contractors will not suffer any prejudice qua the new policy, the court said, “This Court would not sit in the armchair of experts to scrutinise or monitor commercial decisions of the State, in the case at hand, the Railways.”
Rejecting the argument of the petitioners that Circular No.24 of 2023 is vitiated on account of it not being placed before the cabinet, the court said, “The action of notification, can always be ratified by the cabinet, at a subsequent date, as the decision makers in the Railways insofar as notification of policies to run the Railways is, the Railway Minister or the Railway Board, as the case would be. Mere non-placing the circular before the cabinet prior to its notification would not render the circular illegal, as it would be protected by the principle of post facto ratification.”
Accordingly it rejected the petitions.
Appearance: Senior Advocate Jayakumar S Patil a/w Advocate Mahammed Tahir A for Petitioners.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for CGC Sadhana Desai for R1 to R3.
Advocate Abhinay Y T for R4.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 89
Case Title: South Western Railway Catering Contractors Association AND The Union of India & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.4162 OF 2024 C/W WRIT PETITION No.4296 OF 2024