A railway parking licensee sought relief of license fees granted to other contractors during the COVID-19 pandemic and challenged the rejection of his representations. The court found the petition infructuous as the pandemic had ended and dismissed it, leaving alternate remedies open.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
2025:CGHC:54808
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 417 of 2022
M/s. S.K. Furniture Through Its Proprietor Shri Sh. Kaleem Aged About, 30 Years, R/o Near Banjari Mandir, Banjari Road, Ravanbhata, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Resident Of House No. C-272, J.J. Colony, Shiv Vihar, D.K. Mohan Garden, West Delhi, Delhi
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Union Of India Represented By The Secretary To The Government, Ministry Of Railways, 256-A, Rail Bhawan, Raisin Road, New Delhi.
2 - Union Of India Ministry Of Railways, Through Its Chairman, 256-A, Rail Bhavan, Raisin Road, New Delhi.
3 - South East Central Railway Through Its General Manager, O;ce Of General Manager, Old Gm Building, S E C Railway, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
4 - South East Central Railway Through Its Divisional Railway, Manager (Commercial), Raipur Division, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause Title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anmol Sharma, Standing Counsel. Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
11/11/2025
2
10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the alleged impugned order dated 15.09.2021 (Annexure P-8) passed by the respondent No. 1 and all consequences arising thereof by issuance of appropriate writ/writ(s), direction/direction(s) and declare the impugned order as void and inoperative.
10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/writ(s) directing the Respondent authorities for proper adjudication of the case of the petitioner in accordance with law.
10.4 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief(s) direction/direction(s) in favour of the petitioner as this Hon’ble Court may deem 2t and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3 Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a contractor who has executed an agreement with the respondent No. 4 whereby the petitioner has been granted license to run parking areas for the four wheeler vehicles in the Railway premises by the South Eastern Central Railway, Raipur Division, Raipur by which the petitioner entered into an agreement agreeing to certain terms and conditions stipulated. The petitioner executed the contract with the respondent No.3 during the time when the second wave of the COVID-19 situation was prevailing and during that particular period the other persons who were already having the contracts of the parking in the Railway Station were getting the beneBt of the footfall/relaxation of the
3
license fees to be paid to the respondent authorities. The petitioner submitted various representations requesting the respondent No. 4 for consideration of his case for relaxation of the license fees as the pandemic situation was prevailing in the State of Chhattisgarh. But, instead of considering the case of the petitioner the respondents have passed the impugned order dated 15.09.2021 (ANNEXURE P-8) which is sought to be challenged herein.
4 On the other hand, Ms. Anmol Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents submits that with the eEux of time, this petition has been rendered infructuous as the covid-19 pandemic situation is already over. She further submits that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of arbitration which the petitioner has not availed of.
5 We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto.
6 From perusal of the pleadings and submissions advanced by the parties, it transpires that the matter has been rendered infructuous as the covid19 pandemic situation is already over and as such, this petition stands dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to take recourse to alternate remedy that may be available to him, in accordance with law, if so advised.
Sd/Sd/(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Amit
AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.11.11 19:02:24 +0530
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner contractor was entitled to relaxation of railway parking license fees during COVID-19.
Whether to set aside the impugned order dated 15.09.2021 rejecting such relaxation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. S.K. Furniture Through Its Proprietor Shri Sh. Kaleem
Union Of India Represented By The Secretary To The Government, Ministry Of Railways
Union Of India Ministry Of Railways, Through Its Chairman
South East Central Railway Through Its General Manager
South East Central Railway Through Its Divisional Railway, Manager (Commercial), Raipur Division
Ramesh Sinha
Bibhu Datta Guru
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
