catering business but also from other catering businesses, if any, undertaken by the bidder such as at airports, restaurants etc. According to Mr Jahagirdar, this would clearly show that persons who were/are exclusively catering for the Railways are put to a huge disadvantage as now other applicants who have other catering businesses and not necessarily having any experience in catering for the Railways, would not only be allowed to bid, but probably outbid the caterers who exclusively cater to the Railways. We fail to see how this condition can be termed as arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. In fact, this allows others also to participate in the tender process and promotes competition. If the Railways, in its wisdom, choose to give an opportunity and invite tenders from persons other than those who are exclusively catering for the Railways, we see nothing wrong in it. We did not think that such a decision is any way unreasonable, discriminatory or arbitrary requiring our interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As mentioned earlier, to our mind, such a decision of the Railways would be in larger public interest as not only it would promote competition but would ensure participation of reputed players in the field. We, therefore, find no merit in this objection.
