Delhi High Court: In a petition filed on behalf of petitioner under Article 226 of Constitution seeking extension of his licence for a period of seven months from 17-03-2025, Jyoti Singh, J., disposed of the present writ petition with a direction that subject to payment of license fee, petitioner would be allowed to operate the Special Minor Unit 3 (‘SMU’) at Platform 12/13 of New Delhi Railway Station earmarked for Divyang category for a period of seven months from 17-03-2025 at the stipulated license fee.
Background
In the present case, vide letter dated 25-11-2019 and Master License Agreement dated 09-09-2021, the petitioner was awarded license for running SMU at Platform 12/13 of New Delhi Railway Station earmarked for Divyang category for five years at the stipulated license fee, commencing from 08-01-2020 and ending on 16-03-2025.
Petitioner averred that on account of COVID-19 pandemic, he was unable to operate his SMU and therefore, in light of a policy decision taken by the respondents to give extension, treating the pandemic period as dies non, benefit of extension was granted to the petitioner up to 16-03-2025. This petition was preferred for extension of licence period for a period of seven months from 17-03-2025.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
Benefit of the dies non period due to COVID-19 which was given to several vendors, was also given to the petitioner only for a period of sixty-eight days. The Court observed that the petitioner had sought extension of seven months as was granted by this Court in various other decisions. The Court stated that there was no dispute between the parties that petitioner was similarly placed as the petitioners in the writ petitions wherein Courts in similar circumstances had allowed them to operate their Catering Stalls for a further period of seven months from the date of expiry of the extended license periods.
The Court stated that in Mahakal Caters Vijay Jain v. Union of India, W.P. No. 29831 of 2024, decided on 01-10-2024, Madhya Pradesh High Court had granted similar extension of seven months to the petitioner therein. Thus, the Court was of the view that petitioner could not be discriminated and was entitled to the same relief.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the present writ petition with a direction that subject to payment of license fee, petitioner would be allowed to operate the SMU 3 at Platform 12/13 of New Delhi Railway Station earmarked for Divyang category for a period of seven months from 17-03-2025 at the stipulated license fee. This would be further subject to an undertaking by the petitioner on an affidavit before this Court that he would vacate the stall in question on expiry of the extended period of seven months, failing which respondents would be at liberty to remove his goods from the stall. The affidavit should be filed within three weeks.
The Court further clarified that extension of the license of the petitioner would not preclude the railways from inviting fresh tenders for awarding of the license on expiry of the extended period of license of the petitioner.
[Manoj Kumar Agarwal v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 3117 of 2025, decided on 11-03-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Akshat Bajpai, Shobhit Trehan, Atul Pandey, Renuka Parmanand and Vedika Dalmia, Advocates
For the Respondents: Anushkaa Arora, Senior Panel Counsel with Sagar Belwal, Advocate.
Buy Constitution of India HERE
