M/s Aroom Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India

Court
Patna High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12198 of 2019
CNR No. BRHC010494472019
======================================================
M/s Aroon Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. through Mohd. Salim Qureishi, aged
About 73 Years, (Male), Son of Late Sh.Tajammul Husain Qureishi, Office
address at A-113, Road No.2, Mahipalpur Extension, New Delhi-110037.
... ... petitioner/s
Versus
1. Union of India through Chairman, Railway Board and Ex-Officio, Principal
secretary, Government of Inida, Ministry of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New
Delhi-110001.
2. East Central Railway, through General Manager, Danapur, Patna. Bihar.
3. Sr. Div. Mech. Engineer (C and W) East Central Railway, Rajender Nagar
Coaching Complex-Danapur, Patna-800020, Bihar.
4. Senior Coaching Depot , Rajendra Nagar Coaching Complex Danapur
Division, East Central Railwa, Patna-800020, Bihar.
5. Ministry of Labour and Employment, Through Secretary, Shram Shakti
Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110001
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the petitioner/s : Mr. Abhimanyu Vatsa, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 26-10-2026
1. That the present Writ application has
been filed for the following reliefs:-
"i) Issue an appropriate Writ,
order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus directing the Respondents
no.2. and 3 to reimburse/ neutralize the
revised minimum wages in accordance
with the Notification No. S.O. 192(E)
dated 19.01.2017 issued by Respondent

Patna High Court CWJC No.12198 of 2019 dt.26-10-2026
2/6
No. 5.
ii) Issue an appropriate Writ,
order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus directing the Respondents to
ensure reimbursement on account of
40% increase in minimum wages vide
notification dated 19.01.2017 till the
date of completion of the contract shall
duly be given to the petitioner.
iii) Issue appropriate Writ, order
or direction in the nature of Mandamus
directing the Respondent No.2 and
Respondent No.3 not to take any action
against the petitioner for the non-
reimbursement of the minimum wages
by the Respondent No.2 & 3 as per the
notification dated 19.01.2017.
iv) To issue any other
appropriate writ/writs, direction
/directions/ order/orders as this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the present
case."
2. The brief facts culled out of the Writ
Petition are that the petitioner is a company
engaged in providing housekeeping and other
services and was awarded a contract by

Patna High Court CWJC No.12198 of 2019 dt.26-10-2026
3/6
Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for providing "On Board
Housekeeping Services" in trains at RNCC Depot
for three years. Pursuant to the notification dated
19.01.2017 issued by Respondent No. 5, the
minimum wages payable to workers were
substantially increased.
3. The petitioner claims that despite
repeated representations, Respondent Nos. 2 and
3 refused to reimburse the increased labour
costs, relying upon the "Price Variation Clause" of
the agreement.
4. The Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the contractual arrangement was
extended up to 07.04.2019 without resolving the
issue of increased minimum wages.
5. The Learned counsel for the petitioner
further submits that the petitioner is statutorily
bound to pay minimum wages at the revised
rates notified by the Central Government, but
Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have failed to
reimburse the additional labour costs arising from
the substantial increase in minimum wages. It is

Patna High Court CWJC No.12198 of 2019 dt.26-10-2026
4/6
contended that the existing Price Variation Clause
does not adequately cover such an
unprecedented increase and that the refusal to
compensate the petitioner is arbitrary and
unsustainable in law.
6. The Learned counsel for the petitioner
relies upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Union of India & Ors. v. M/s A2Z
Infra Services Ltd. & Anr. , wherein the
judgment of the Bombay High Court in [ A2Z
Infraservices Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors .]
was upheld. In the said case, the Railways was
held liable to reimburse the difference in labour
costs arising from the revision of minimum wages
for the period during which the contract
remained in force. The Learned counsel,
therefore, prays that the present Writ Petition be
allowed in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
7. Counter affidavit has not been filed on
behalf of the respondents. However, the Learned
counsel for the respondents submits that the Writ
Petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be

Patna High Court CWJC No.12198 of 2019 dt.26-10-2026
5/6
dismissed. It is, accordingly, prayed that no relief
be granted to the petitioner.
8. Heard the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the materials available on
record.
9. The principal issue for consideration is
whether the petitioner is entitled to
reimbursement of the additional labour costs
arising from the revision of minimum wages
under the Notification dated 19.01.2017.
10. It is undisputed that the petitioner is
statutorily bound to pay minimum wages at the
revised rates. The Price Variation Clause (PVC) in
the contract must be interpreted in a manner
that gives effect to its purpose of neutralising
variations in labour costs. The Respondents
cannot deny reimbursement merely on the
ground, that the clause is linked to the Consumer
Price Index, particularly when the contract also
requires compliance with statutory labour laws.
11. The issue is covered by the decision
of the Bombay High Court in A2Z Infraservices

Patna High Court CWJC No.12198 of 2019 dt.26-10-2026
6/6
Ltd. (supra) , wherein it was held that the
Railways is liable to neutralise the increased
labour costs resulting from the revision of
minimum wages for the period during which the
contract remains in force. The said view was also
upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
12. In view of the aforesaid legal position
and the facts of the present case, the petitioner
is entitled to reimbursement of the difference in
minimum wages arising from the Notification
dated 19.01.2017 for the period during which the
contract remained in force. Accordingly, the Writ
Petition deserves to be allowed to the aforesaid
extent.
13. Interlocutory Application(s), if any,
shall stand disposed of.


(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Spd/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 29.10.2026
Transmission Date