ANIL BAREJAL BAREJA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner 's sole proprietorship concern participated in a tender floated by the South Eastern Railway for leasing of 23 tonne Parcel Van (VPH) on round-trip basis in different trains vide Tender Notice No. Com/G27/Parcel-Lease/VPH/18-VII dated December 11, 2018. The petitioner became the highest bidder, and a letter of allotment was issued in favour of the proprietorship concern of the petitioner on March 27, 2019. The petitioner was asked to submit security deposit to the tune of Rs.1,01,55,906.00 (Rupees One Crore One Lakh Fifty-Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Six only) by way of fixed deposit receipt and to execute an agreement. The petitioner submitted the security deposit videFixed Deposit A/C No.09253031158719 dated April 10, 2019 drawn on the respondent no.5-bank.

(2.) Thereafter, the petitioner executed an agreement with the South Eastern Railway on May 3, 2019 for leasing 23 tonnes Parcel Van (VPH) by Train No. 12834/12833 (Howrah - Ahmedabad Express) Ex-Shalimar to Ahmedabad and back for a period of 05 (five) years.

(3.) It is contended that the petitioner, in terms of the said agreement, had commenced loading and unloading at both the Shalimar and the Ahmedabad Stations upon payment of advanced freight. However, subsequently, the petitioner started facing problems at the time of loading and unloading at the Shalimar station which, according to the petitioner, was in contravention of Clause 11.6 of the agreement. It is contended by the petitioner that the inconvenient timings of placing parcel vans at Shalimar Station by the Railway Authority caused huge loss of business to the petitioner, since the petitioner was unable to load perishable goods due to the long waiting time under the open sky.