SINGH CATERERS AND VENDORS Vs. RAILWAY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE appears on behalf of the petitioners. Heard learned counsel for the respondents. The two writ petitions are inter -parties, have a good deal in common, one set of arguments have been advanced on behalf of the respondents, and are being disposed of by a common order.

(2.) RE : CWJC No. 6736 of 2005 Three petitioners have joined together in the two writ petitions. According to the writ petition, Petitioner No. 1 claims to be a partnership firm, and Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 claim to be its partners. The petitioners are engaged in catering business and have been bagging catering contracts from the Indian Railways from time to time. CWJC No. 6736 of 2005 has been preferred challenging the latest catering policy of 2005 (Annexure 5) issued by the Indian Railways which replaces the earlier policy of the year 2000. The petitioners are, inter alia, aggrieved by the following portion of the policy whereby the basic eligibility criteria for the contenders for doing catering job in different trains have been revised upwardly. The relevant portion of the policy is set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference: ''

(3.) IT is further relevant to state that the previous policy decision of 2000 was the subject matter of a batch of writ petitions before the Kerala High Court which were dismissed by a Division Bench by judgment dated 3.2.2001, passed in WA No. 2913 of 2001 (K.N.Venkateswaran V/s. Govt. of India & Anr.). A copy of the judgment is annexed to the counter affidavit of the Railways, Paragraph 56 whereof is reproduced hereinbelow: ''