Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38703-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37261 of 2017 Petitioner :- M/S Mahadev Foods And Another Respondent :- Divisional Railway Manage North Central Rail. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Bharat Pratap Singh,Rohit Nandan Pandey,Sanjeev Kumar Pandey,Sr. Advocate,Vinay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Manoj Kumar Singh,Navaneet Chandra Tripathi,Saurabh Srivastava Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. Heard Mr. Dharam Pal Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S.K. Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Bharat Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Navaneet Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent-railway department. 2. This writ petition is directed against the orders passed by the railway-authorities on 8th June, 2017 and 20th June, 2017 insofar as they restrict the benefit of incentive scheme for incremental traffic to two racks only of the dates 16th May, 2015 and 11th June, 2015. Prayer is made to direct the railway-authorities to grant the benefit of incentive scheme for incremental traffic for the period 1st November, 2014 to 31st October, 2015. 3. It is pointed out that the petitioner had approached this Court earlier by means of Writ-C No. 51687 of 2015 (M/S Mahadev Foods Vs. Divisional Railway Manager North Central Railway & 3 Ors.), which was allowed on 9th/11th July, 2015 with a direction to the railway-anchorites to revisit the matter. It is thereafter that the orders impugned in the present writ petition have been passed. 4. Perusal of the records would indicate that there existed a scheme for grant of incentive to incremental traffic in the year 2014. This scheme continued to exist and has ultimately been discontinued by the railway-authorities vide subsequent policy dated 16th June, 2015. The decision of the railway- authorities in discontinuing the incentive scheme is not under challenge in the present writ petition. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that notwithstanding the discontinuance of the scheme, the railway authorities have continued to extend benefit of incentive scheme to others while such benefit has been denied to the petitioner. 6. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has clearly disclosed the date when the wagons/railway racks were utilized by the petitioner. In paragraph-55 of the writ petition the dates as are mentioned are 27th July, 2015, 5th August, 2015, 12th August, 2015, 12th September, 2015 and 26th October, 2015. It is apparent that the the claim which is being made by the petitioner is in respect of the wagons availed after 16th June, 2015, which is the date of discontinuance of the policy. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent-railways has filed a counter affidavit and their counsel makes a categorical statement that for the period till the policy remained in existence i.e. 16th June, 2015, the benefit admissible in terms of the policy is already extended to the petitioner. It is further submitted that after 16th June, 2015, nobody was entitled to such benefit including the petitioner. 8. The stand of the respondents is challenged primarily with reference to the averments made in paragraph-18 of the present writ petition, which is reproduced here-under: "18. That similarly situated consumers, like M/s ITC Ltd. Agri Business Division, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and M/s Nandi Enterprises, Raja Mandi, Shahjahanpur, who have been transporting goods from Etah to SGWF (Bangalore) granted the benefit of the freight incentive schemes. The petitioner is entitled to grant the benefit of the said scheme like the aforesaid persons. Photocopies of the orders dated 25.11.2014 and 11.03.2015 granting approval to both the firms are being collectively annexed as Annexure No.6 to this writ petition." 9. The respondent-railway authorities have referred to Annexure No.6 to the writ petition, which is the grant of benefit to certain other persons under the incentive scheme for incremental traffic. These letters are of 25th November, 2014 and 11th March, 2015. Admittedly, these letters are of a date prior to the discontinuance of the policy i.e. 16th June, 2015. There is no averment in the writ petition that even for any period after 16th June, 2015 such benefit has been granted to any one else. 10. The grant of benefit for incremental traffic once has been discontinued on 16th June, 2015, we find no error in the decision of the respondent-railway authorities in not extending such benefit for the transactions made after 16th June, 2015. Benefit upto 16th June, 2015 has already been granted. 11. There is no specif assertion in the writ petition that any one else has been granted benefit of policy after 16th June, 2015. The mere fact that the letters of 25th November, 2014 and 11th March, 2015 made references to the period after 16th June, 2015 cannot be of much significance inasmuch as on the date when these letters were sent, the policy was in existence and had not been discontinued and since the petitioner has not asserted that in fact such benefit has been granted to any of those persons after 15th June, 2015, we find that the plea of discrimination taken on behalf of the petitioner is clearly not made out. 12. The present writ petition lacks merit and is consequently dismissed. (Donadi Ramesh, J.) (Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.) Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Sushil/- Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad