Delhi HC upholds Railway Board’s decision to suspend caterer who carried LPG cylinders on trains despite guidelines against cooking with flames

In a recent verdict, the Delhi court has upheld the Railway Ministry’s decision to suspend the operations of Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd., which provides catering and back-end services to the Indian Railways, following an incident in which the company was found to be LPG bottles were carried on trains, even though there were regulations against cooking with open flames in dining cars.

The court noted that this was not the first time that the plaintiff had been provided with a rake without flameless cooking capability.

Justice Subramonium Prasad leading the case, observing, “The fact that the train in question was delayed cannot be used as an excuse by an experienced contractor like the plaintiff as it is not uncommon in India for trains to be delayed due to several factors and the contractors who provide catering services to the passengers , be prepared.” Find out about all eventualities and make appropriate arrangements in advance to provide passengers with hot, cooked food. It should be noted that the trip lasted from 11/20/2022 to 11/28/2022. During inspection on 24.11.2022 in Madurai, five gas cylinders were seized by the RPF.”

“From 11/24/2022 to 11/28/2022, the plaintiff provided food to the passengers without using LPG cylinders, that is, the plaintiff made an agreement after LPG cylinders were removed from the train. The excuse given by the plaintiff that the plaintiff handed over the train only at the last moment and without any arrangements for flameless cooking and therefore the plaintiff could not make alternative arrangements cannot be accepted. The plaintiff carried LPG cylinders only to reduce costs.” Justice Prasad added.

The objection in the writ petition was against an order of the Ministry of Railways dated 16.01.2023 suspending the employment of the petitioner for six months and imposing a penalty of Rs 2 lakhs.

The petitioner, which provides back-end services to the Railways, was awarded the contract for providing services to the divine ‘Swadesh Darshan’ train in South India. However, the train’s supply car lacked provisions for flameless cooking, necessitating the use of LPG cylinders. Despite the petitioner’s request for a long truck rake to enable better service, the train departed 15 hours late.

During a surprise inspection, LPG cylinders were confiscated, leading to a complaint for violating safety regulations. The petitioner justified the use of LPG on the grounds of last-minute handover and the need to comply with tendering obligations. As the respondents were dissatisfied with the response, they imposed penalty and suspended the office of the petitioner, which led to the present writ petition challenging the order.

Taking into account the evidence before it, the court found: “The circulars issued by the railways are clear in their wording and prohibit cooking with open flames in dining cars. As the learned counsel for the defendant has rightly pointed out, the plaintiff is not a newbie. He has been providing services for the railway since 2019.”

The petitioner’s counsel pleaded for leniency towards other service providers who use LPG cylinders. In response, respondents submitted an action report dated February 19, 2024.

Examining the report, the court noted: “The engagement of the plaintiff and another company named TMI Enterprise was kept in abeyance as their license was for a single trip and the licenses of three service providers namely M/s Rathour Services, M/s Satyam Caterers Pvt . Ltd. and M/s Araha Hospitality Private Limited (formerly known as Jayanta Kumar Ghosh) have been terminated. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to accept the plaintiff’s contention that the plaintiff was singled out.”

In addition, the court assessed whether the sentence imposed on the plaintiff was proportionate to the crime. It stressed that serious violations should not be ignored and the seriousness of the offense was a determining factor in determining the punishment.

“For a Supreme Court to intervene in punishment, the punishment must be so disproportionate to the misconduct that the Supreme Court is compelled to intervene. In the absence of disproportionality, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Courts cannot fix and tinker with the quantum of punishment just because a different view is possible.” emphasized the court.

Consequently, the Court declined to interfere in the decision to suspend the employment of the plaintiff for catering and back-end services to the Indian Railways for six months.

The lawsuit was therefore dismissed.

Case title: Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. vs. Union Of India & Anr.

Click here to read the ruling