SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the extraordinary jursidiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for calling for the records from the respondents No. 1 and 2 relating to screening and selection process for grant of licence for 'Fruit Stall' on platforms No.2 and 3 of Itarsi junction of Central Railway and further' to quash the licence granted in favour of respondent No.3. The further Prayer in the writ petition is to command the respondents No. 1 and 2 to invite fresh application for grant of aforesaid licence.

(2.) THE facts which are essential for disposal of the writ petition are thus: The respondent No.1, by advertisement, invited application from persons belonging to Scheduled Caste for availing 'Fruit Stall' for the platforms No. 2 and 3 of ltarsi junction. In pursuance of the advertisement, the petitioner submitted an application for the same after completing all the necessary formalities and attaching all the necessary documents. An acknowledgement receipt of the application was also issued to the petitioner. While he was expecting that he would be called for interview, he came to know that interview letters have been issued to other applicants but the same was not sent to him. It is set forth that he was not even communicated about the rejection of his application.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Imtiaz Husain, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. S.K. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2; and Mr. Ashok Lalwani, learned counsel for M1e respondent No.3. It is submitted by Mr. Imtiaz Husain that the Screening Committee was not constituted in accordance with the policy and, therefore, the whole process of selection is vitiated. Mr. Mukherjee, learned counsel for Railways on the contrary, has submitted that the committee has been constituted by taking two Senior Scale Officers and one Junior Scale Officer and the shortlisting by them would not vitiate the whole process of selection. Learned counsel for the Railways has also highlighted that the petitioner has not filed the necessary and relevant documents alongwith the application and even if there is irregularity in the formation of Committee, that would not vitiate the ultimate selection. Mr. Ashok Lalwani has adopted the submissions advanced by Mr. Mukherjee. To justify the action of the Railways, Mr. Mukherjee has produced the file relating to the decision taken by the Screening Committee as well as by the Selection Committee.