Dev Raj And Others vs Union Of India And Others on 30 January, 2009

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                 CHANDIGARH


                                     C.W.P NO. 20926 OF 2008
                                     DECIDED ON : 30.01.2009

Dev Raj and others
                                                   ...Petitioners
           versus

Union of India and others
                                                   ...Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT


Present : Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate,
          for the petitioners.


SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

The petitioners who are stated to be running tea stalls

at the Railway Station, Ludhiana, are apparently claiming

themselves to be the sub-tenants of respondent NO.3, who is

stated to be the Misc. Articles Contractor of Platform No.1 at

Railway Station, Luhiana for the last several years. The

petitioners’ grievance is that they are being harassed by the third

respondent, who is demanding hefty charges/special license fee

of over Rs.2 lacs per year from them on the pretext that the

railways have enhanced the license fee. In support of their plea

that they are running stalls at the Railway Station, Ludhiana, the

petitioners have placed reliance upon some identity cards

reportedly issued in their favour as sales men of respondent

No.3.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

taking into consideration that the writ petition involves disputed
C.W.P NO. 20926 OF 2008 -2-

questions of facts and also keeping in view the fact that if the

allegations were true, the same may affect the petitioners’ source

of livelihood, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with

liberty to the petitioners to approach the General Manager (North

Zone) of the Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation

Limited – respondent No.2 with a comprehensive representation

and if such a representation is made by them within one month

from today, the said authority shall consider and dispose of the

same after a fact finding inquiry and in accordance with law.

The needful shall be done within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the

representation.

JANUARY 30,2009                            (SURYA KANT)
Shalini                                          JUDGE