Manglam Express Cargo Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.

1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No

2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.Oral: *

1 By this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks directions to direct the respondent to extend the lease of the petitioner in 2011:DHC:4161 respect of 4 tonnes parcel space (RSLR) in Train No. 4008 Ex. DLI to MFB w.e.f. 8.4.2011 till 7.4.2013 in terms of Clause (E) of the Comprehensive Parcel Leasing Policy (CPLP) and clause 18 of the Contract between the parties.

2. Brief facts relevant for deciding the present petition are that a written lease agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent No.2 for leasing of Parcel Space in Brake Vans having carrying capacity of 04 tonnes in Train No.4008-R Ex. DLI to MFP for a period of three years i.e. 08.04.2008 to 07.04.2011 with a clause for extension of lease for further two years. As the lease was scheduled to expire on 7.4.2011, the petitioner vide letter dated 22.2.2011 sought extension of the lease under the terms and conditions as stipulated in the CPLP as well as the contract and to the utter surprise of the petitioner, the respondent refused the said extension and consequently the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 3.6.2011. As per the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to an unconditional extension for a period of two years in terms of the comprehensive parcel leasing policy as well as the contract and hence feeling aggrieved with the same, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present petition is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this court in a batch of writ petitions in the matter of Kishan Freight Forwarders Vs. Union of India, decided on 2.6.2011. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has been denied unconditional extension of lease for a period of two years in terms of Clause (E) of the Comprehensive Parcel Leasing Policy and Clause 18 of the contract between the parties. Counsel also submits that the petitioner has always maintained an excellent performance record and there has not been any complaint against the petitioner of any contravention or violation of the terms of the said leasing policy or about the services rendered by the petitioner during the lease period. Counsel also submits that the petitioner has no case of over loading or any imposition of penalty on the petitioner due to violation or breach of any terms of the contract. Counsel also submits that the respondent has granted extension to identical situated contractors on unconditional terms and even to those contractors against whom there were complaints of overloading. Counsel also submits that the action of the respondent denying the said unconditional extension of lease for a period of two years is arbitrary and illegal. In support of his arguments counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Patna High Court in M/s. Scorpion Express Pvt. Ltd Vs. UOI & Ors and the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in M/s. S.G. Traders & Anr. Vs. UOI & Ors.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. The counsel for the respondents has not disputed the applicability of the said judgment of Kishan Freight Forwarders (supra) to the facts of the case of the present petition. I have gone through the aforesaid judgment and found that the learned court has comprehensively dealt with all the objections raised by the respondent and the facts of the present case being totally identical, therefore I do not find any reason to decline relief to the petitioner as sought in the present petition.

6. In the light of the aforesaid position, the respondents are directed to extend the lease of the petitioner and grant the extension in the contract for 04 tonnes (RSLR) in Train No.4008-R Ex. DLI to MFP for a period of two years w.e.f. 08.04.2011 in terms of Clause (E) of the Comprehensive Parcel Leasing Policy and Clause 18 of the Contract between the parties.

7. With the above directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J AUGUST 16, 2011 dc