GOLAM MOHIUDDIN Vs. EASTERN RAILWAYS & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this art.226 petition dated September 16, 2011 is questioning a decision of Eastern Railway dated August 2/29, 2011 (at p.28) giving him a fresh opportunity of paying Rs.21,692 deposit for renewing his halt contract agency for the period from January 7, 2011 to July 6, 2013.

(2.) Mr Mondal appearing for the petitioner and relying on the case stated in para.8 of the petition and the document at p.27, has submitted as follows. The Railway never before asking for a deposit cannot ask for one now on the basis of a circular during whose existence the term of the agency was extended without a deposit. Since the petitioner works investing his own money, there is no reason for the Railway to feel insecure and demand a deposit.

(3.) Mr Banerjee appearing for the Railway has produced Commercial Circular No.26 of 2005 dated June 24, 2005 issued by the Railway Board regarding deposit while renewing or awarding fresh contract at the existing halt stations. He has also said that after determining the amount according to law at Rs.21,692, the competent authority of the Railway issued a letter dated January 18, 2011 asking the petitioner to pay it as a deposit.