KD FOODS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing letter no. C.724/CV/DHN/2022 dtd. 31/3/2022 (Annexure-14 to the writ petition) issued by the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, East Central Railway, Dhanbad (the respondent no. 4) whereby the said respondent has intimated the petitioner that the contract of catering/vending of Stall No.-2 situated at platform no. 1 of Dhanbad Railway Station (hereinafter referred as the said Stall) has been terminated by the competent authority forfeiting its security deposit of Rs.40,000.00 due to non-payment of due license fee since 31/10/2021 and has asked the petitioner to remove structure of the said catering/vending stall immediately. Further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to appoint an arbitrator within one month to resolve the dispute and the operation of the letter dtd. 31/3/2022 may be stayed till passing of the award by the arbitrator.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.4 issued notice inviting applications for grant of license for the said Stall under Special Minor Unit (SMU) for Scheduled Caste (women) category for a period of 5 years. Pursuant to the said notice, the petitioner applied for allotment of the said Stall whereupon the same was allotted to it and a letter of acceptance to that effect was issued by the Divisional Railway Manager (C), East Central Railway, Dhanbad on 2/11/2018. Thereafter, an agreement was executed between the petitioner as "Licensee" and the respondent no. 4 as "Railway" on 14/10/2019. The period of the agreement was mentioned as 5/2/2019 to 4/2/2024. The petitioner sent letter to the respondent no. 4 on 6/8/2020 stating that though the contract was for the period from 5/2/2019 to 4/2/2024, however the said stall was opened on 6/9/2019 and as such the period/tenure mentioned in the agreement dtd. 14/10/2019 should be effective from the opening date of the said Stall i.e. 6/9/2019. Moreover, the petitioner also requested to correct the wrongly mentioned amount of license fee in the said agreement as Rs.2,54,788.00 instead of Rs.2,11,000.00. The respondent no. 4 issued letter dtd. 17/11/2020 to the petitioner informing that letter dtd. 28/10/2019 was already sent to it regarding correction of license fee. Moreover, the clarification regarding commencement date of catering stall as mentioned in the agreement was also sent to the petitioner vide letter dtd. 24/2/2020. The petitioner was further directed to deposit the licence fee of Rs.2,54,788.00for second year within seven days. The petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.28,525.00 on 17/12/2021 with respect to catering license fee for the period from 1/5/2021 to 31/7/2021. The Divisional Railway Manager (C) issued notice to the petitioner vide letter dtd. 18/2/2022 for non-deposition of license fee for the period from 1/11/2021 to 31/10/2022 with respect to operation and maintenance of catering stall at Dhanbad station with an advice to deposit the due license fee with effect from 1/11/2021 onwards as per the agreement signed by the petitioner within 7 days failing which necessary action was to be taken as deemed fit including termination of contract and forfeiture of security money, but it failed to deposit the same. The petitioner deposited catering license fee of Rs.42,092.00 for the period from 1/8/2021 to 31/10/2021 vide receipt dtd. 16/3/2022. However, the respondent no.4 vide order dtd. 31/3/2022, terminated the petitioner's contract of catering/vending stall and forfeited the security money of Rs.40,000.00 deposited by it due to non-payment of license fee after 31/10/2021. It was also asked to remove the structure of catering/vending stall immediately.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, in course of argument, refers to Article 19.1 of Master License Agreement dtd. 14/10/2019 executed between the petitioner and the respondent no. 4 and submits that in case of any dispute arising between the parties, the same is required to be resolved in terms of the General Conditions of Contract for works of Railways and as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, "the Act,1996) as amended from time to time and the rules framed thereunder. The main grievance of the petitioner is that since a dispute between the parties has arisen, the respondent no. 4 should have referred the said dispute for arbitration in terms with the said Article of Master License Agreement dtd. 14/10/2019 instead of prematurely terminating the contract/agreement. Learned counsel for the petitioner also refers to the order dtd. 3/11/2014 passed by learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 372 of 2014 (Adarsh Arun Balmuchu @ A.A. Balmuchu Vs. Union of India and Ors.) and other analogous cases and submits that this Court exercising the writ jurisdiction may refer the dispute between the parties for arbitration in terms with Article 19.1 of the agreement dtd. 14/10/2019 as well as may restrain the respondents from removing the petitioner's catering/vending stall as has been directed by the respondent no. 4 vide impugned order dtd. 31/3/2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his submission, also puts reliance on order dtd. 15/2/2018 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 678 of 2009 (R.K.Devi Vs. Union of India and Others).