- (1.) Instead of hearing the stay application, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties we have taken the appeal itself for final disposal by treating the appeal as on day's list.
(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1st July, 2009 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition subject to certain observations. Appellant No. 1 is a trade union espousing the cause of persons, who are interested in working for gain at the railway station, particularly Howrah Railway Station by carrying luggage, goods and articles of the passengers travelling by trains leaving or reaching Howrah Railway Station. Since the Superintendent of Railway Police and his subordinates, such as Deputy Security Commandants, RPF of the Eastern Railway and South Eastern Railway did not permit the members of the appellant-union to work for gain in the above manner, the appellant union preferred a writ petition giving rise to the present appeal, praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the members of the appellant-union to enter the Howrah Railway Station/compound for continuation of their occupation as porters with luggage/articles/goods of the railway passengers and for ancillary reliefs. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the members of the appellant-union are not licensed porters and, therefore, they have no right to function as railway porters nor be entitled to enter the Howrah Station for the purpose of rendering services of porters. While dismissing the writ petition on the above ground, the learned Single Judge also observed that the order will not prevent the members of the union from applying in accordance with law, to be licensed porters at the Howrah Station.
(3.) At the first hearing of this appeal, the learned Counsel for the appellant- union had made a grievance that the respondent- authorities had not declared any policy or guidelines for making applications to be licensed porters at the Howrah Railway Station and that the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Howrah and Public Information Officer, under the Right to Information Act, gave reply dated 6th January, 2010 (in response to the appellant's representation dated 8th December, 2009) which is as under: "Item-1 The daily average passenger figure using Howrah Station is 6,00,040 (approx) figure. Item-2 1532 (one thousand five hundred thirty two) license have been issued to the licensed porter (Lall Collie) at Howrah station. Item-3 There is no any notification for fresh engagement of license porter through open market. Hence there is no question for any last date of granting license. Item-4 There is no provision for renewal of license of licensee. Item-5 As per provision of Indian Railway Comml. Manual, licensed porters are engaged by the Railway Administration for carrying passenger luggage within the station limits on payment of prescribed porterage charges. The above reply is based on records available with this office. The appellants filed a supplementary affidavit dated 2nd February, 2010 producing the above reply and in opposition thereto, respondent No. 8, i.e. the Deputy Commandant, R.P.F. Eastern Railways filed affidavit dated 3rd March, 2010. The stand reflected in the said affidavit-in-opposition is as under: "1. There is no system of renewal of license badge of license porter. License badge is awarded to the license porter because of their work. License remains valid till the death of the licensed porter or till he becomes invalid, old or very sick, thereafter license is transferred to his son or near relative.";