- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38955 WP No. 26473 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 26473 OF 2025 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN: M/S SEEMA CATERERS SITUATED AT 777, 9TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD BLOCK 1ST STAGE, HBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU -560043 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. ALTAF ULLA SHARIFF SON OF MUNAWAR SHARIFF AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHAMMED TAHIR A.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAVAN RAISINA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001 2. THE CHAIRMAN RAILWAY BOARD THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAVAN Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38955 WP No. 26473 of 2025 RAISINA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001 3. M/S INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND T OURISM CORPORATION (IRCTC) SITUATED AT 11TH FLOOR, STATESMAN HOUSE BUILDING B-148, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001 REP BY ITS CHIEF MANAGING DIRECTOR 4. M/S INDIAN RAILWAY CATERINF AND TOURISM CORPORATION (IRCTC) SITUATED AT 4TH FLOOR, T OWER-D, WORLD TRADE CENTER NAUROJI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110029 REPRESENTED BY ITS GROUP GENERAL MANAGER/PROCUREMENT 5. M/S INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION (IRCTC-SZ) SITUATED AT 6A, THE RAIN TREE PLACE 9 MC NICHOLS ROAD, CHETPET, CHENNAI-600031 REP BY ITS GROUP GENERAL MANAGER/SZ/IRCTC …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY V., CGC FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. ABHINAY Y. T, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED LIMITED E- TENDER DATED 01.09.2025 FOR PROVISION OF ONBOARD CATERING SERVICES FOR A PERIOD OF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38955 WP No. 26473 of 2025 3 MONTHS IN TRAIN NUMBER 12677-78 ERS-SBC INTERCITY EXPRESS VIDE NUMBER 2025/IRCTC/WBC/06/M1/AUGUST/02 VIDE ANNEXURE-H BY TREATING IT AS UNJUST, UNFAIR AND ULTRAS VIRES. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court notwithstanding this Court’s order on 20.08.2025 in W.P.No.25213/2025. It would suffice for this Court to record that based on a submission made, this Court in the afore writ petition has observed that the petitioner will be entitled to offer services in terms of the order dated 30.05.2025 until Long Term Tender [LTT] is floated and finalized, or until there is a decision by the third respondent [M/s. IRCTC] to take over the services itself or to assign the services to another licensee. This Court has also observed that the disposal of the writ petition in such terms cannot - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38955 WP No. 26473 of 2025 be a reason for any extension beyond the time contemplated in the order dated 30.05.2025. 2. The present petition is because the respondents, notwithstanding this Court's order, have floated the impugned Short Term Tender [STT] for three months again. Mr. Abhinay Y. T, the learned counsel for M/s. IRCTC, cannot dispute that this tender is in the teeth of this Court's order, but proposes to justify the same stating that M/s. IRCTC has revamped the pantry facilities in the coaches and therefore, there must be a higher fee paid lest the respondents are financially prejudiced. 3. The order dated 30.05.2025 is clear in stipulating that the petitioner is given the contract for onboard catering services for three months, which stood expired on 09.09.2025 with the possibility of further extension of three months. In terms of this stipulation, the petitioner will be entitled to the period upto 08.12.2025. This Court is of the opinion - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38955 WP No. 26473 of 2025 that notwithstanding the justification or the constraints that could be, the respondents could not have issued the impugned tender in the light of this Court's order and therefore, it must yield. 4. When queried in the light of this opinion, Mr. Abhinay Y. T. submits that under the impugned tender, the highest offer received is in a sum of Rs.27,31,000/- for three months and that the petitioner has paid, in terms of the original order, a sum of Rs.18,45,000/-. The learned counsel is also clear that if there were to be any extension as contemplated, the petitioner would not have been called upon to pay any additional fee. The disposal of the present petition is considered in the light of these facts as also the petitioner's specific case that it cannot contest any decision by the respondents either to issue STT or the LTT or any other arrangement that they may deem it proper in their - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38955 WP No. 26473 of 2025 discretion for the period after 01.09.2025. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER The petition is allowed quashing the impugned tender dated 01.09.2025 [Annexure - H] and stipulating that the petitioner shall continue to offer services until 08.12.2025 but the petitioner, apart from a sum of Rs.18,45,000/-, should also pay another Rs.4,50,000/-. It is further stipulated that if there is any default, it shall be open to the respondents to cancel the arrangement. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB