Introduction:

The Karnataka High Court recently rendered a significant decision upholding the 2023 addendum to the Railways Catering Policy of 2017. The petition, filed by the South Western Catering Contractors Association, challenged the Commercial Circular of 14-11-2023, which mandated the establishment of Base Kitchen infrastructure at both originating and enroute stations. The court, presided over by Justice M Nagaprasanna, dismissed the petition, emphasizing the Railways’ prerogative in making commercial decisions for public interest. The dispute centered around the addendum’s deviation from the 2017 policy and the petitioners’ contention that it should have undergone cabinet scrutiny.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The petitioners, representing catering contractors, argued that the 2023 addendum contradicted the 2017 policy, which was a result of cabinet decisions. They contended that the Railways’ Minister and Board, rather than the cabinet, introduced the addendum. The respondents justified the addendum, highlighting its focus on hygiene, responsibility, and accountability for food served on trains. The Railways explained that the shift aimed to address accountability issues arising from contractors with limited kitchens. The introduction of QR codes on food packets ensured real-time tracking of kitchen origins, enhancing both hygiene and accountability.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice Nagaprasanna, examining the policy, addendum, and Railway’s statement, deemed the addendum legal, emphasizing its alignment with public interest objectives of hygiene, food quality, and accountability. The court rejected the petitioners’ argument that the addendum undermined the 2017 policy, asserting that the Railways’ commercial decisions fell within its jurisdiction. The bench stated that entering the realm of monitoring food preparation and distribution on trains was beyond the court’s purview.

Addressing concerns about cabinet scrutiny, the court asserted that post facto ratification could validate actions not initially placed before the cabinet. Since no prejudice to existing contractors was established, the court rejected claims that Circular No.24 of 2023 was vitiated.