Syed Sirajuddin vs The Senior Divisional Commercial on 2 July, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 14040 of 2008(U)


1. SYED SIRAJUDDIN, S/O.SYED CHANSAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL
                       ...       Respondent

2. INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING & TOURISM

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SC,RAILWAY CATERING

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :02/07/2008

 O R D E R
                           S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                   ==================

                    W.P.(C).No.14040 of 2008

                   ==================

               Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a licensee running a fruit stall in the Calicut

Railway Station. According to the petitioner, he has been

conducting the fruit stall for the last 28 years. As per the new

policy decision of the Railways, 25 per cent of the catering stalls

in railway stations is reserved for various categories such as OBC,

SC/ST, minority community etc. The petitioner has got a claim

for reservation as a member of an OBC and a minority

community. Now in accordance with that policy decision of the

Railways, it has been decided to set apart the particular stall

which is being run by the petitioner as one reserved for schedule

castes. The petitioner now presses his claim for reservation as a

OBC/minority community member and allotment of a stall

accordingly. Seeking this relief the petitioner has filed Ext.P8

representation before the 1st respondent. The petitioner seeks a

direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P8 expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the

w.p.c.14040/08 2

Railways also. On the basis of the counter affidavit filed on

behalf of the 2nd respondent, the standing counsel would contend

that in view of the changed policy, the petitioner is not entitled to

the relief prayed for. However, I feel that the 1st respondent

should consider Ext.P8 in accordance with the policy of the

Railways. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a

direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate

orders on Ext.P8 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt

of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The petitioner shall

produce a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of

this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance.

Sd/-

sdk+                                        S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE


             ///True copy///




                                P.A. to Judge

w.p.c.14040/08    3