NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

W.P.(C)/2389/2017 of M/S R.K. ASSOCIATES & HOTELIERS PVT. LTD. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2017-09-08
Case number
2389/2017

Parties

Cites (1)

Statutes cited (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 2389/2017 & CM APPL. 10297/2017

M/S R.K. ASSOCIATES & HOTELIERS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Jitender Mehta, Advocate Through Mr. Jitender Mehta, Advocate

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Preet Singh with Mr. Sukhdev Singh and Ms. Kiran Kaushik, Proxy Counsel for Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for R-1/Railways. Through Mr. Preet Singh with Mr. Sukhdev Singh and Ms. Kiran Kaushik, Proxy Counsel for Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for R-1/Railways.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R R% 15.03.2017

Present petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to refund the security amount of Rs.1,48,97,000/- deposited by the petitioner in terms of the Awards of the contracts for operation and management of on-board catering service in Train Nos. 1015-16, 2397-98, 2367-68, 2839-40, 2615-16, 2925-26, 2003-04, 2001-02, 2433-34, 2431-32 and 2429-30.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite various letters and reminders, the respondents have failed to refund the security deposits.

perusal of the paper book reveals that the petitioner’s representations have not been disposed of till date.

Consequently, present writ petition and application are disposed of with direction to petitioner to file fresh comprehensive representation before the respondent-IRCTC within period of ten days. In the event the representation is filed within the stipulated period, respondent-IRCTC is directed to dispose of the same within further period of four weeks by way of reasoned order, in accordance with law.

However, keeping in view the petitioner’s mis-interpretation in its

letter dated 10[th] November, 2016 of similar orders passed by this Court, it is clarified that the Court has not directed refund of security deposit but has directed disposal of the petitioner’s representation within four weeks by way of reasoned order in accordance with law.

MARCH 15, 2017

MANMOHAN, J