Full Judgment Text
$~37 to 69
* IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI
nd
% Date of decision: 2 February, 2026
+ W.P.(C) 19100/2025 & CM APPL. 79494/2025
KAUSHALYA MEENA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNLON OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rohan Jaitley, CGSC with Mr.
Viplav Acharya, SPC, Mr. Yogya
Bhatia, Advocate for UoI.
38
+ W.P.(C) 19103/2025 & CM APPL. 79501/2025
ANIL KUMAR JHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Himanshu Sethi, SPC with Mr.
Sanjay Pal, GP.
Mr. Rishabh Sahu, SPC with Mr.
Sameer Sharma and Mr. Karan
Malhotra, GP.
39
+ W.P.(C) 19107/2025
MD NASIR ALAM .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 1 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Umang Chopra, SPC with Mr.
Karan Malhotra, GP.
40
+ W.P.(C) 19187/2025
MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Shashank Bajpai, CGSC with Ms.
Aashna Mehra and Mr. Vatsal
Tripathi, Advocates.
41
+ W.P.(C) 11962/2025 & CM APPL. 48798/2025, CM APPL.
52939/2025
MEGHNA RAJENDRA KUMAR MANGLA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Vikrant N. Goyal, Mr. Piyush
Wadhwa, Mr. Yash Basoya and Mr.
Kunal Dixit, Advocates.
42
+ W.P.(C) 19198/2025 & CM APPL. 79974/2025
SHANTI KRISHAN DARBAR .....Petitioner
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 2 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Nirvikar Verma, Senior Panel
Counsel and Mr. Varun Kumar,
Advocate for UoI (through video-
conferencing ).
Mr. Mayank Sharma, Senior Panel
Counsel for UoI.
43
+ W.P.(C) 19194/2025 & CM APPL. 79963/2025
M/S RAJA CATERER .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through:
44
+ W.P.(C) 19283/2025
RAM BHAJANGOND .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Ekta Chaudhary & Ms. Rushali
Sikand, Advocates for UoI.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 3 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
45
+ W.P.(C) 19458/2025 & CM APPL. 81143/2025
RAKESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh & Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Piyush Gupta, CGSC with Mr.
Atishay Jain, Ms. Yamini Bansal and
Ms. Diksha Bansal, Advocates.
46
+ W.P.(C) 19540/2025
NITU SINHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Ramjee Pandey, SPC.
47
+ W.P.(C) 16692/2025 & CM APPL. 68498/2025
M/S SHIV SHAKTI FOODS .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 4 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rohan Jaitley, CGSC with Mr.
Dev Pratap Shahi, Mr. Varun Pratap
Singh and Mr. Yogya Bhatia,
Advocates.
48
+ W.P.(C) 12880/2025 & CM APPL. 52588/2025
MS BH CATERING SERVICE .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Shubhra Parashar, Mr. Gaurav
Khosla and Mr. Virender Pratap
Charak, Advocates for UoI.
Mr. Gopesh Jindal and Ms. Malvika,
Advocates for R-1.
49
+ W.P.(C) 12914/2025 & CM APPL. 52788/2025
MEGHNA RAJENDRA KUMAR MANGLA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Vikrant N. Goyal, Mr. Piyush
Wadhwa, Mr. Yash Basoya and
Mr.Kunal Dixit, Advocates.
50
+ W.P.(C) 12959/2025 & CM APPL. 52919/2025
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 5 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
MS JAYABEN CATERERS .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. P.S. Singh, CGSC with Ms. Annu
Singh, Advocates for UoI.
Mr. Sarvesh P. Shrivastava, GP.
51
+ W.P.(C) 13249/2025 & CM APPL. 54375/2025
SMT. SMITA S KUSHWAHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Chetanya Puri, SPC with Mr.
Anand Awasthi and Mr. Rishabh Jain,
Advocates.
52
+ W.P.(C) 13433/2025 & CM APPL. 55133/2025
SH. BASUKINATH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 6 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
Through: Ms. Neha Rastogi, Senior Panel
Counsel with Mr. Sharank Dubey,
Advocates.
53
+ W.P.(C) 13783/2025 & CM APPL. 56466-56467/2025
SAGAR RAJENDRA KUMAR MANGLA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Chetanya Puri, SPC with Mr.
Anand Awasthi and Mr. Rishabh Jain,
Advocates.
54
+ W.P.(C) 13794/2025 & CM APPL. 56604/2025
SMT. MANJU JAISWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, CGSC with
Muhammad Aamir Khan, Advocate.
55
+ W.P.(C) 13804/2025 & CM APPL. 56628/2025
SAGAR RAJENDRA KUMAR MANGLA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 7 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Chetanya Puri, SPC with Mr.
Anand Awasthi and Mr. Rishabh Jain,
Advocates.
56
+ W.P.(C) 13846/2025 & CM APPL. 56767/2025
SH. BASUKI NATH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Neha Rastogi, Senior Panel
Counsel with Mr. Sharank Dubey,
Advocates.
57
+ W.P.(C) 13869/2025 & CM APPL. 56848/2025
MANOJ KUMAR AGRAWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. P.S. Singh, CGSC with Mr.
Arnav Mittal, G.P for UoI.
Mr. Siddharth Shankar Ray, CGSC
with Ms. Sonali Modi and Mr. Mukul
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 8 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
Dev, Advocates.
58
+ W.P.(C) 14034/2025 & CM APPL. 57391/2025
SMT. VIBHA AMIT GUPTA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. P.S. Singh, CGSC with Ms. Annu
Singh, Advocates for UoI.
59
+ W.P.(C) 14367/2025 & CM APPL. 58821-58823/2025
KAUSHALYA MEENA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Viplav Acharya, SPC for UoI.
60
+ W.P.(C) 15695/2025 & CM APPL. 64180/2025, CM APPL.
76429/2025
DEEPAK NARAIN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 9 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sandeep Tyagi, Senior Panel
Counsel with Mr. Mayank Saraswat,
Advocate for UoI.
61
+ W.P.(C) 15799/2025 & CM APPL. 64737/2025
SA)JJEEV KUMAR KUSHWAHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Ruchir Mishra, SPC with Mr.
Sanjiv Kumar Saxena, Mr. Mukesh
Kumar Tiwari, Ms. Reba Jena Mishra
and Ms. Poonam Shukla, Advocates
for UoI.
62
+ W.P.(C) 15858/2025 & CM APPL. 64921/2025
MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Siddharth Shankar Ray, CGSC
with Ms. Sonali Modi & Mr. Mukul
Dev, Advocates.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 10 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
63
+ W.P.(C) 17319/2025 & CM APPL. 71290-71292/2025
M/S OM SAI RAM ENTERPRISES .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Anshuman, SPC with Mr.
Vaibhav Sood, Advocate.
64
+ W.P.(C) 17324/2025 & CM APPL. 71298/2025
SADEEK ALI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Himanshu Nayyar, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Nakul Sharma,
Advocates. (Through VC)
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajendra Sahu, Senior Panel
Counsel for UoI with Mr. Nitin Jain
(G.P.) and Ms. Nitika Dubey,
Advocates.
65
+ W.P.(C) 17981/2025 & CM APPL. 74362/2025
KAUSHALYA MEENA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 11 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Viplav Acharya, SPC for UoI.
66
+ W.P.(C) 17998/2025 & CM APPL. 74505/2025
KAUSHALYA MEENA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta, Mr. Lalit Kumar,
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Shivam
Pahal, Mr. Avaneesh Singh and Ms.
Neha Malik, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through:
67
+ W.P.(C) 18626/2025 & CM APPL. 77416/2025
MANJU DEVI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Akhil Mittal, SPC for UoI with
Ms. Shanya Das Pattanayak and Ms.
Riddhi Jain, Advocates.
68
+ W.P.(C) 18665/2025 & CM APPL. 77560/2025
M/S B H CATERING SERVICE .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 12 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Shubhra Parashar & Mr. Virender
Pratap Singh Charak, Advocates for
UoI.
69
+ W.P.(C) 18963/2025
ARVIND KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwary, Mr.
Chandan Kumar, Mr. Shubham Rai
and Mr. Jay Prakash Pathak,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, CGSC
with Mr. Siddharth Bajaj and Mr.
Sujeet Kumar Chaudhary, Advocates
for UoI.
Mr. Surjeet Singh, G.P.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. All the aforesaid writ petitions have been filed seeking direction to the
respondents to renew the catering license awarded in favour of the
petitioners by the respondents.
2. Since all the present writ petitions raise a common issue, all the said
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 13 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
petitions are being decided by way of this common judgment.
th
3. At the hearing on 28 January, 2026, it was decided that W.P.(C)
19100/2025 and W.P.(C) 11962/2025 shall be the lead matters.
4. Accordingly, the facts in W.P.(C) 19100/2025 have been considered
for the purposes of this judgment.
st
5. On 21 January, 2020, the respondents allotted to the petitioner a
license for operating Catering Stall / Special Minor Unit (Women) No.24 at
Platform no.6, Vadodara Railway Station.
6. A Master License Agreement was signed between the petitioner and
st
the respondents on 21 October, 2020. In terms of the said Master License
Agreement, the tenure of the license was for a period of five (5) years from
th th
17 October, 2020 to 17 October, 2025.
7. There was an earlier round of litigation in which similarly placed
persons who had been allotted catering units at various railway stations
under Catering Policy 2017. A batch of writ petitions were filed claiming the
following reliefs:
“1. The present batch of petitions under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India has been filed inter alia seeking the following
reliefs:
a. to declare the Clause No. 11 of the Commercial Circular No. 20 of
2017 dated 27.02.2017 (“Catering Policy 2017”) issued by Railway
Board as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, null and void-ab-initio.
b. to declare impugned Licence Agreement executed between
petitioner and concerned respondent as illegal, arbitrary,
unconstitutional, null and void-ab-initio and also set aside the License
Agreement as regards its tenure is concern;
c. a direction to the respondents to renew the license of the petitioners
catering units in terms of judgment passed by Supreme Court of India
South Central Railways v. S.C.R. Caterers, Dry Fruits, Fruit Juice
Stalls Welfare Assn. ;
d. a direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of extension of
license period to the petitioners in proportionate to the reduced
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 14 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
license fee during the Covid-19 pandemic period and as per the
benefit given to other units.”
8. The aforesaid batch of petitions was decided by a Coordinate Bench
th
of this Court vide judgment dated 30 May, 2024.
9. The Coordinate Bench held that the licenses of the petitioners were
subject to terms and conditions outlined in the Catering Policy 2017 and
hence were non-renewable. The relevant observations made in the said
judgment are given below:
“14. I have given anxious consideration to the matter. I am unable to
agree with the contention of the petitioners that they are entitled to
renewal of license.
15. The petitioners participated in the tender for grant of license,
knowing fully well that tenure of the license shall be for 5 years only
and there shall be no extension/renewal. The petitioners were
successful in the tender. License agreements were also executed
between the parties. The petitioners are operating their catering
units since then. Now at the fag end of expiry of their tenure, they
seek to challenge Clause 11 of the Catering Policy 2017 and seek an
extension in derogation of the terms of the license. The same cannot
be permitted. The petitioners were under no compulsion to enter into
these contracts. It is not open for the petitioners who are the
successful bidders to turn around and seek to avoid the terms set out
in the license.
*
20. Accepting the contentions of the petitioners would tantamount to
holding that they have a permanent, indefeasible and perpetual right
to seek extension/renewal of their licenses for an indefinite period of
time. This cannot be permitted. Accepting the plea of the petitioners
would also have a deleterious impact on the railways as the same
would tantamount to holding that once the railways has granted a
license to any particular person, it is denuded of the power to bring
the license to an end, despite contractual provision/s to the contrary.
This would completely inhibit the railways from introducing fresh
financial/public participation models and/or offering opportunities to
another deserving set of persons to operate catering units.
*
22. The minor catering units reserved for specific categories are
exclusively allocated to eligible individuals from those reserved
categories. Individuals from reserved categories are not competing
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 15 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
against those from the general category (or corporations) for the
allocation of catering units. Further, as highlighted by learned
counsel for the respondents, re-tendering of minor catering units
serves to rectify disparities in opportunities within the same group of
individuals. This ensures a larger portion of the public (within their
respective categories) has access to adequate livelihood opportunities.
In facts of the present case, this court is unable to comprehend how
the policy decision of the railway to re-tender catering units after
expiry of the tenure would deprive right to livelihood to the
petitioners. The petitioners are at liberty to participate in fresh
tender that may be floated by the railways. They will be pitted against
the individuals from the same category. For example, a person who is
below the poverty line will be competing for a catering unit against a
person who is below the poverty line, and not against any
corporations. Granting a license in perpetuity, as is sought by the
petitioners, would be antithetical to equality of opportunity
guaranteed under the Constitution. In the factual context of these
cases, that the contention that the Clause 11 of the Catering Policy
2017 is violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of
India, is completely unfounded. The said contention is consequently
rejected.
23. In the present case, the licenses held by the petitioners are subject
to the terms and conditions outlined in their respective licenses and
Catering Policy 2017. The terms of license and said policy explicitly
render the licenses non-renewable. Consequently, it is beyond the
purview of this Court to mandate the renewal of a license in
derogation of the Catering Policy 2017 and in derogation of the
express terms of license.”
[emphasis supplied]
10. In light of the aforesaid findings, the writ petitions were dismissed.
However, the Court gave three (3) months’ period to the petitioners therein
to vacate the catering units in question, subject to payment of the license fee.
The findings given in paragraph 30 of the aforesaid judgment are set out
below:
“30. In the circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the present
petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed. However, since the
petitioners have been operating these minor catering units for a
significant period of time, to enable the petitioners to make a
transition and make alternative vending arrangement/s, this Court
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 16 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
considers it apposite to grant a period of 3 months to the petitioners
(from the date of the extended license period after taking into account
the dies non period; OR from the date of this judgment, whichever is
later) to vacate the catering units in question. The same shall be
subject to payment of usual license fee. It is directed accordingly.”
11. The aforesaid judgment was challenged by the petitioners therein
before the Division Bench. However, the appeals were dismissed by the
Division Bench. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the judgment of the Division Bench
th
dated 9 August, 2024, are set out below:
“7. On identical issues, raised in LPA 743/2024 titled “Ram Kumar
th
Agarwal vs. Union of India & Ors” decided on 5 August, 2023; LPA
745/2024 “Manoj Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India & Ors” decided
th
on 5 August, 2023 and LPA 748/2024 “Hani Khatoon vs. Union of
th
India & Ors” decided on 6 August, 2023, we have repelled similar
arguments and dismissed the said appeals. The only difference being
in the nature of stalls, in that, in those appeals, the issue pertained to
catering trolleys/stalls whereas in this appeal, it concerns the book
stalls. Other than that, the issues are identical. In those appeals, we
have only reiterated the directions contained in para 30 of the
impugned judgement therein passed by the learned Single Judge.
8. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed, reiterating the
th
directions in para 36 of the impugned judgement dated 29 May, 2024
passed in the underlying writ petition. Pending applications stand
disposed of. No order as to costs.”
12. The judgment of the Division Bench was challenged by the petitioners
therein by way of Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, which
th
was dismissed vide order dated 27 August, 2024. However, while
dismissing the SLPs, the Supreme Court extended the time granted by the
Single Judge by a further period of four (4) months.
13. The petitioner herein, filed a fresh writ before this Court being
WP(C) 6379/2025, seeking grant of extension of seven months in terms with
th
the judgment of this Court dated 30 May, 2024 as modified by the Supreme
Court. The said writ petition was disposed of with the following directions:
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 17 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
“14.Accordingly, it is directed that, subject to payment of license fees,
the petitioner will be allowed to operate the Special Minor Unit
(SMU) (Women)/Catering Stall No. 24 at Platform No. 6 of Vadodara
Railway Station for a period of 7 months from 16th October, 2025, at
stipulated license fees.
15.The petitioner is directed to file an undertaking, on an affidavit,
before this Court, within a period of four weeks from today, that the
petitioner shall vacate the stall in question, on expiry of the extended
period of 7 months, failing which, the respondents will be at liberty to
remove the goods of the petitioner, from the stall in question.”
14. The present writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners premised
on a new document which came to the knowledge of the petitioners i.e.
‘Indian Railway Code for Traffic (Commercial) Department, Revised
Edition,1993’ (‘Indian Railway Code for Traffic’). The petitioners have
placed reliance on para 712 of the said document to claim that the licenses
granted in their favour can be further extended, subject to the performance
of the licensee being satisfactory. The relevant para 712 relied by the
petitioner is set out below:
“ Renewal
712. After expiry of 5 years, the licence can be further extended
subject to the performance of the licencee being satisfactory during
the previous agreemental period. The decision regarding renewal
shall be taken based on the recommendations of the Screening
Committee and shall consist of 3 SAG Officers, in case of
large/important units and at least senior scale level for other units. ”
15. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that they are entitled to the
benefit of renewal of license in terms of the aforesaid para 712. This para
was amended by the respondents during the pendency of the present writ
th
petitions on 14 January, 2026 in the following terms:
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 18 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
16. It is contended that the aforesaid amendment to para 714 is
prospective and hence would not be applicable to the petitioners who are
prior allotees.
17. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the
aforesaid policy document is not applicable to the petitioners. It is stated that
para 703 of the said policy document clearly provides that this policy is not
applicable where the licenses have been given on the basis of a tender. This
policy would apply only where licenses have been given by calling for
applications. Para 703 on which reliance is placed by the respondents is set
out below:
“ Applications
703. Catering/vending licences should be awarded by calling
applications. Tender system for selection of licencees shall not be
followed. Applications should be invited only from professional and
reputed caterers through press advertisement. ”
18. This Court finds merit in the submission of the respondents that the
aforesaid policy document is not applicable in the case of the petitioners
who have all been granted licenses pursuant to a tender document.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 19 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
19. The petitioners entered into a Master License Agreement with the
respondents wherein the terms and conditions of license were stipulated. The
Master License Agreement states that the license has been granted in terms
of the 2017 Catering Policy. The Master License Agreement also clearly
stipulates that there cannot be any renewal of the license. The relevant
clauses of the Master License Agreement are set out below:
“WHERE AS:
A. Railway has mandated under the Catering Policy 2017 (“Policy”) to
improve, inter-alia, the quality of catering services for providing food
and beverage services to passengers.
*
ARTICLE 3: TENURE OF THE AGREEMENT
3.1 The Tenure of the Agreement will commence on the
Commencement Date, as provided in Article 1.1, as Five (5) years
only and subject to the provisions of Article 9 and Article 17 herein
th
below, if not terminated. The contract period is from 17 October,
2020 (Saturday).
19.1 There will be no extension/renewal.”
[emphasis supplied]
20. Therefore, in my considered view, the reliance placed by the
petitioner on the aforesaid Indian Railway Code for Traffic is completely
misplaced. Consequently, the amendment to para 712 of the said Catering
Policy of 2017 would be of no consequence. The issue regarding the
entitlement of the petitioners to seek a renewal of their license has been
th
decided by this Court in the judgment of 30 May, 2024, which has been
upheld till the Supreme Court. The present petitions are nothing but an
attempt to reopen the issue which has already been settled.
21. It is also pertinent to note that pursuant to the earlier round of
litigations, all the petitioners have filed undertakings before this Court
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 20 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
stating that they will vacate the premises after the seven (7) months’ period
extension granted to them.
22. By filing the present writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking to resile
from the said undertaking which cannot be permitted.
23. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W.P.(C) 11962/2025
th
has placed reliance on a communication dated 12 November, 2024 issued
by the Jabalpur Branch of the Railways wherein an extension has been
granted to one of the caterers running a food stall at Jabalpur Railway
Station. Hence, it is contended that the respondents are acting in a
discriminatory manner.
24. The respondents in their counter affidavit filed in the aforesaid
petition have duly explained that there is no parity between the case of the
petitioner and the case of the contractor in Jabalpur to whom extension has
been granted.
25. It has been explained that the license of old catering units which were
originally awarded prior to the Catering Policy of 2010, was renewed in that
case. Therefore, no case of parity is made out by the petitioner.
26. The petitioners have also placed reliance on the order passed by the
Rajasthan High Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5981/2025 wherein a
direction has been issued to the respondents to constitute a Screening
Committee as per para 712 of the guidelines to consider the application of
the petitioner for renewal of the license.
27. The said order passed by the Rajasthan High Court does not contain
any reasons and therefore does not hold any precedential value. Nor does it
th
appear that the judgment passed by this Court on 30 May, 2024 was
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 21 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20
brought to the attention of the Rajasthan High Court in the said case.
28. In light of the facts which have been brought forth before this Court
by the respondents, including the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of
th
this Court on 30 May, 2024, I am not inclined to follow the approach
adopted by the Rajasthan High Court.
29. In view of the discussions above, this Court does not find merit in the
aforesaid batch of petitions. Consequently, the writ petitions along with all
pending applications are dismissed.
30. A direction is issued to the petitioners to forthwith handover
possession of the premises where the seven (7) months’ period extension
granted by the orders passed by the Court have already expired.
31. In matters where the aforesaid seven (7) months’ period has not
expired, the petitioners shall handover possession to the respondents after
the said seven (7) months’ period expires.
AMIT BANSAL, J.
FEBRUARY 2, 2026
Rzu
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19100/2025 and connected matters Page 22 of 22
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:06.02.2026
10:48:20