Delhi High Court Issues Notice To IRCTC On Plea To Relax License Fee For Catering Services In East & West Zones Amid Covid-19

The Delhi High Court today issued notice to IRCTC (Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation) on an appeal seeking relaxation in license fee granted to newly allotted catering units of the East & West Zones, at par with the North & South Zones, amid Covid-19.

A Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Amit Bansal denied interim relief and kept the matter for hearing on October 22.

The appeal is filed against a single Judge order dated September 6, where it was held that by participating in the tender process the Petitioner (Appellant herein) had submitted to its contractual terms with open eyes, and cannot now challenge the same.

"Petitioners having not challenged the tender condition and submitting their bids cannot now after participating and being declared successful, seek variation of the tender condition on the ground that preferential treatment is being given to another zone which is covered by a different Tender Document," the single Judge had ruled.

In appeal, it has been contended that they have been discriminated in so far as East and West zones are concerned. They submitted that differential treatment is being given to the tenderers who have submitted bids in the North and South zones.

Advocate Jayant K Mehta, appearing for the Appellant, added that such discrimination is violative of their rights under Article 14 of the Constitution and hence, the single judge erred in holding that the Appellant has waived off his right. "There cannot be a waiver of fundamental rights," he argued.

Opposing the appeal, Advocate Nikhil Majithia for the Respondent, appearing on advance notice, submitted that the issue has become infructuous in view of a letter written to IRCTC by the Appellant, seeking an honorable exit from the contract.

"The same was granted to them. So what remains now? They can't hunt with the hounds and run with the hare also," Majithia submitted.

At this juncture, Mehta clarified that the said exit is in respect of only 2 stations, whereas they were declared successful in as many as 10 units. "I continue my operations in remaining stations. So the issue is very much alive," Mehta said.

Case Title: Shiv & Sons & Anr. v. IRCTC Ltd.