w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. Premier Garments Processing, Rep. by its Proprietor, Ibrahim Sha, Chennai v/s The Divisional Railway Manager, Salem & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- PREMIER LIMITED [Active] CIN = L34103PN1944PLC020842

Company & Directors' Information:- D R GARMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101GJ2005PTC046010

Company & Directors' Information:- R. R. GARMENTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51900MH1995PLC095544

Company & Directors' Information:- S G GARMENTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101WB2004PLC098193

Company & Directors' Information:- K K P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65921TZ1994PTC005334

Company & Directors' Information:- B K GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2001PTC109850

Company & Directors' Information:- N K GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2000PTC107093

Company & Directors' Information:- K. D. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109WB2005PTC101896

Company & Directors' Information:- G AND A GARMENTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101PB1995PTC016121

Company & Directors' Information:- V H GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52322MH2008PTC181066

Company & Directors' Information:- M S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1991PTC046660

Company & Directors' Information:- S. S. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL1996PTC083315

Company & Directors' Information:- CHENNAI GARMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101TN2005PTC058277

Company & Directors' Information:- P & S PROCESSING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U37100DL2011PTC213392

Company & Directors' Information:- G. M. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109DL2006PTC152683

Company & Directors' Information:- D AND D GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1975PTC007923

Company & Directors' Information:- PREMIER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52520TG1993PTC016684

Company & Directors' Information:- J S GARMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900WB2009PTC135262

Company & Directors' Information:- K. B . GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109WB2011PTC166954

Company & Directors' Information:- A K GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17120DL2015PTC282847

Company & Directors' Information:- D P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2004PTC129479

Company & Directors' Information:- V S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC143084

Company & Directors' Information:- P AND P GARMENTS PVT LTD [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC143556

Company & Directors' Information:- V S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101HR2005PTC068124

Company & Directors' Information:- L. H. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17121KA2011PTC060761

Company & Directors' Information:- N. M. PROCESSING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17299WB2019PTC234072

Company & Directors' Information:- K R GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17111WB1998PTC087046

Company & Directors' Information:- T & A GARMENTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U52321TN1993PTC025318

Company & Directors' Information:- P. S. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18204DL2007PTC164238

Company & Directors' Information:- S. A. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17121DL2007PTC165007

Company & Directors' Information:- T S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51494DL1996PTC076668

Company & Directors' Information:- GARMENTS INDIA PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909GJ1979PTC003310

Company & Directors' Information:- I G S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2004PTC128723

Company & Directors' Information:- M. P. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17291DL2007PTC164129

Company & Directors' Information:- K. S. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2007PTC164404

Company & Directors' Information:- B G GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL2005PTC142488

Company & Directors' Information:- S P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2003PTC120709

Company & Directors' Information:- P N GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL2004PTC127524

Company & Directors' Information:- V P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18109DL2012PTC233293

Company & Directors' Information:- S T GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109DL2015PTC277043

Company & Directors' Information:- P L GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17120DL2013PTC248417

Company & Directors' Information:- M. K. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17291DL2007PTC164395

Company & Directors' Information:- R A GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP and Dissolved] CIN = U18101DL2003PTC123385

Company & Directors' Information:- C S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC134787

Company & Directors' Information:- B L GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC136912

Company & Directors' Information:- B D S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC137898

Company & Directors' Information:- T G GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC143392

Company & Directors' Information:- G P S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U18101DL2006PTC149330

Company & Directors' Information:- G P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2007PTC161067

Company & Directors' Information:- I B GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL2013PTC257044

Company & Directors' Information:- G P S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U74110DL2006PTC149330

Company & Directors' Information:- A G GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51300DL2013PTC257609

Company & Directors' Information:- V R V GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL2008PTC182256

Company & Directors' Information:- M V GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899HR2005PTC141797

Company & Directors' Information:- A AND R GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17120HR2013PTC049037

Company & Directors' Information:- V K GARMENTS PRIVATE LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL1981PTC012410

Company & Directors' Information:- A S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17212CH1992PTC012350

Company & Directors' Information:- V R GARMENTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101CH1991PTC011345

Company & Directors' Information:- S B GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL2005PTC141954

    W.P. Nos. 9723 & 17914 of 2018 & W.M.P. Nos. 21211, 27019, 11643, 18753 & 24515 of 2018

    Decided On, 24 September 2018

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM

    For the Petitioner: Abishek Jenasenan, Advocate. For the Respondents: P.T. Ram Kumar, Advocate.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: WP No.9723 of 2018 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 09.04.2018 in No.SA/M 271/CTS/STN/ED/2017 of the second respondent and quash the same.

WP No.17914 of 2018 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to accept the Performance Guarantee No.004 GT02181730007 dated 22.6.20187 issued by HDFC Bank Limited, Salem and permit the petitioner to continue with the work of Mechanised cleaning of En-route pass through Trains under CTS Scheme at Erode Railway Station pursuant to the Letter of Acceptance dated 13.3.2018 in No.SA/M 271/CTS/STN/ED/2017 of the second respondent.)

1. The cancellation order issued by the Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer, Southern Railway, Salem in proceeding dated 09.04.2018, cancelling the letter of acceptance issued in favour of the writ petitioner is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that, he is the contractor for several works under the Southern Railways in respect of Cleaning and washing bed sheets in various trains and supply bed rolls and various other works under the Southern Railway. The petitioner is doing all his works to the satisfaction of the authorities and without any complaint whatsoever.

3. The second respondent had called for tenders for the work of mechanized cleaning of en-route pass through trains under CTS scheme and mechanized house keeping works at Erode Railway Station under tender notice No.SA-M-02-2018 dated 12.01.2018. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioner also had participated in the tender and his offer was accepted by the second respondent and accordingly, the letter of acceptance was issued in proceeding dated 13.03.2018.

4. The second respondent issued the said letter of acceptance to the petitioner to proceed with the work of mechanized cleaning of en-route pass through trains under CTS scheme and mechanized house keeping works at Erode Railway Station, for a period of 4 years at a total value of Rs.14,83,16,764.90/-. Further it was stated that, the work will commence within 21 days from the issuance of the letter of acceptance or as per the instructions of the Engineer-in-charge. It is further stated that, in case, the contractor fails to commence the work as per the terms and conditions of tender after issue of letter of acceptance, then the letter of acceptance shall be cancelled and the tender security shall be forfeited.

5. The petitioner was called upon to submit the performance security for Rs. 1,48,312,680/- which is 10% of the contract price from the scheduled commercial bank in India. The petitioner has also made arrangements to provide the performance security and commence the work on 01.04.2018. Pursuant to the letter of acceptance and the award of contract in favour of the petitioner, he procured machineries to carry out the work of mechanized cleaning to the tune of about Rs.40 lakhs and has already been recruited 141 employees for the purpose of executing the work. The petitioner had invested huge sum in order to start the work and continued the work without any default. The period of work is to be performed for 4 years at a total value of Rs.14,83,16,764.90/-.

6. Under these circumstances, to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, the impugned letter dated 09.04.2018 was issued stating that, due to administrative reasons, the letter of acceptance dated 13.03.2018 is cancelled without any financial repercussion on either side. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed. Other writ petition No.17914 of 2018 has been filed to direct the respondents to accept the performance guarantee No.004 GT02181730007 dated 22.06.2018 issued by HDFC Bank Limited, Salem and provide the work of mechanized cleaning of en-route pass through trains under CTS scheme at Erode Railway Station pursuant to the letter of acceptance dated 13.03.2018.

7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner states that, absolutely there is no reason for issuing the impugned cancellation order. The impugned cancellation of letter of acceptance is non-speaking and no reason has been assigned for the cancellation. Except the word 'due to administrative reason' no other reason has been stated in the impugned order. Therefore the respondents cannot now come forward with the grounds that the writ petitioner had failed to furnish the performance security as per the terms and conditions of the contract.

8. It is contended that, the writ petitioner had purchased the machineries to commence the contract work. He has already invested a huge amount and recruited 141 employees for the purpose of proceeding for the contract work. In these circumstances, cancellation order if accepted will cause great prejudice to the writ petitioner and therefore, the writ petitions are liable to be allowed.

9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, Southern Railways, objected the arguments in this regard by stating that, the letter of acceptance was issued on 13.03.2018. The General Conditions of Contract, 2014 dated 30.06.2014 categorically states that, the successful bidder has to submit performance guarantee within 30 days from the date of issue of letter of acceptance. Clause 16(4) denotes the performance guarantee and the same reads as under:-

'16.(4) Performance Guarantee:

The procedure for obtaining performance guarantee is outlined below:

(a) The successful bidder shall have to submit a Performance Guarantee (PG) within 30 (thirty) days from the date of issue of Letter of Acceptance (LOA). Extension of time for submission of PG beyond 30 (thirty) days and up to 60 days from the date of issue of LOA may be given by the Authority who is competent to sign the contract agreement. However, a penal interest of 15 % per annum shall be charged for the delay beyond 30 (thirty) days, i.e. From 31st day after the date of issue of LOA. In case the contractor fails to submit the requisite PG even after 60 days form the date of issue of LOA, the contract shall be terminated duly forfeiting EMD and other dues, if any payable against the contract. The failed contractor shall be debarred from participating in re-tender for that work.

(b) The successful bidder shall submit the Performance Guarantee (PG) in any of the following forms, amounting to 5% of the contract value:

1. A deposit of cash;

2. Irrevocable Bank Guarantee;

3. Government Securities including State Loan Bonds at 5% below the market value;

4. Deposit Receipts, Pay orders, Demand Drafts and Guarantee Bonds. These forms of Performance Guarantee could be either of the State Bank of India or of any of the Nationalized Banks;

5. Guarantee Bonds executed or Deposits Receipts tendered by all Scheduled Banks;

6. A Deposit in the Post Office Saving bank;

7. A Deposit in the National Savings Certificate;'

10. Clause 2.0 provides Cleaning materials/ detergents/ reagents and Clause 2.1 reads as under:-

'The environmental friendly cleaning reagents/detergents to the extent possible to be used for cleaning & housekeeping operations. These should be free from chemical reactions, odorless and should not affect to Commuters, Employees, materials & equipments etc. Employer;s approval should be obtained before using the cleaning detergents/reagents materials. The Contractor shall submit the final list of Eco friendly reagents/detergents/chemicals with all the necessary Technical details & Test reports which are needed for approval within 3 days of awarding of contract. The Contractor will also submit details of Disinfectants, chemicals/pesticides for pest control/ Rodent control with full technical details within 3 days for approval. Employer has a right to alter the given approval any time during the period of contract'.

11. Clause 8.0 and Clause 8.1 states, submittal by the successful tenderer and commencement of work and the same reads as under:-

'8.0. Successful tenderer shall submit the following for getting the approval from the Employer within 21 days from the date of issue of LOA'

'8.1. Deployment of minimum man-power as mentioned in Appendix-6 along with CVs of the personnel. Each CV shall have the current photographs of the person and shall be signed by the person. Each CV shall be submitted duly verified by the Contractor's authorized representative and shall contains the following information but not limited to:-

a. Name in full

b. Father's Name

c. Date of Birth

d. Present Address

e. Permanent Address

f. Educational Qualifications

g. AADHAR Card Number

h. Cleaning & housekeeping experience

i. Any other experience

On top of every CV, the proposed category is also to be indicated, in case the individual does not have AADHAR card, it is the contractor's obligation to provide necessary assistance in obtaining the same within one month of deployment of said staff on duty.'

12. Relying on the said General Conditions of Contract 2014, issued by the Indian Railways, the learned counsel for the respondents states that, the writ petitioner has failed to submit a performance guarantee within the period of 30 days from the date of issue of letter of acceptance. Extension of time also has not been sought for by the writ petitioner. Thus, the petitioner had failed to perform his portion of the obligation in respect of submission of a performance guarantee. This apart, as per clause 2.1, the contractor shall submit a final list of Eco friendly detergents/reagents/chemicals with all the necessary technical details and test report which are needed for approval within 3 days to the awarding of contract. The Contractor will also submit the details of Disinfectants, chemicals/pesticides for pest control/ Rodent control with full technical details within 3 days for approval.

13. The petitioner has failed to submit all these details as per Clause 2.1 within the time stipulated. Further as per Clause 8.0, the successful tenderer shall submit the following for getting the approval from the employer within 21 days from the date of issue of letter of acceptance. Deployment of minimum man-power as mentioned in Appendix-6 along with CVs of the personnel and all those details were not submitted duly by the writ petitioner within the time limit stipulated in the General Conditions of Contract, 2014. At the outset, it is contended that, the petitioner has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the General Conditions of Contract 2014 issued by the Indian Railways.

14. Thus, the present writ petitions are liable to be rejected.

15. The learned counsel for the respondents further states that, the letter of acceptance issued in favour of the writ petitioner dated 13.03.2018 categorically states that, 'the work will commence within 21 days from the date of issue of letter of acceptance or as per the instructions of the Engineer-In-Charge. In case, the contractor fails to commence the work (for whatsoever reasons) as per terms and conditions of tender after issue of letter of acceptance then the letter of acceptance shall be cancelled and the tender security shall be forfeited.' As per the said conditions, the petitioner had not commenced the work within 21 days from the date of issue of letter of acceptance. Thus for all these reasons, the writ petitioner has failed to perform his obligation as warranted under the General Conditions of Contract as well as the letter of acceptance.

16. The Office of the Senior Superintendent Engineer/CNW dated 08.04.2018 states that, the mechanized cleaning work of En-route pass through trains under CTS scheme was not started by the contractor so far. Thus, the petitioner has not commenced the work as per the letter of acceptance by performing the obligations stipulated in the General Conditions of Contract as well as in the letter of acceptance. Even the petitioner himself admitted the fact that he has not commenced the work within 21 days in his representation dated 22.06.2018.

17. The very request made by the writ petitioner shows that, he will commence the work in the event of granting permission. It is brought to the notice of this Court that, pursuant to the cancellation of the letter of acceptance, a fresh tender notification was issued by the respondents Southern Railways on 16.04.2018. The re-tender proceedings were already commenced and the writ petitioner was also granted liberty to participate in the re-tender. In this view of the matter, the present writ petitions are devoid of merits and liable to be rejected.

18. This Court is of an opinion that, undoubtedly, the letter of acceptance was issued in favour of the writ petitioner on 13.03.2018. However, the same was cancelled by the respondents in proceeding dated 09.04.2018 after a lapse of about 26 days. Thus the writ petitioner had not commenced the work as per the letter of acceptance within the period of 21 days from 13.03.2018. The letter of acceptance categorically enumerates that, the work will commence within 21 days from the date of issue of letter of acceptance or as per the instructions of the Engineer-in-charge. In the present case, the writ petitioner had not commenced the work within the period of 21 days. Even the performance guarantee as per the General Conditions of Contract 2014 had not been complied with by the writ petitioner within that period.

19. This apart, the writ petitioner has not submitted any request for extension of time for submission of performance guarantee. Thus, the writ petitioner has not performed his portion of the duties contemplated in the terms and conditions of the contract. This apart, the details as required under the General Conditions of Contract has not been complied with by the writ petitioners. As per Clause 16.4.(a) and Clause 2.1, Clause 8.0 and Clause 8.1, The petitioner has not fulfilled the conditions and therefore the petitioner cannot now say that, he was ready and willing to commence the job as per the time stipulated in the letter of acceptance.

20. This Court is of an undoubted opinion that mechanized cleaning of Railway Stations and the Railway Coaches are of paramount importance, the interest of the public at large are involved in these aspects. In the interest of health of the passengers, who are travelling in the trains, it is necessary and mandatory on the part of the respondents to maintain the Railway Stations and the Railway Coaches cleanly. The Southern Railway is duty bound to maintain cleanliness, both inside the train as well as in the Railway Stations. It is brought to the notice of this Court that for the past about 8 months, the cleaning works are not done in respect of en route pass through trains passing Erode Station as well as the Railway Stations itself. When it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Railway Stations and the Railway Coaches are not cleaned properly for the past eight months, the agony of the passengers, who all are travelling in that route is certainly a concern and the same needs to be addressed by this Court.

21. Frequent complaints are made from the passengers that cockroaches, rats and other insects are mostly found inside the Railway Coaches as well as in the Railway platforms. Even in First AC and other Higher Classes, the Coaches are not maintained cleanly as per the norms even prescribed by the Indian Railways.

22. On a perusal of the General Conditions of Contract, 2014, various procedures and cleaning materials to be utilised are mentioned. Clause 2.2 of the General Conditions of Contract, 2014, stipulates that 'The Clelaning and Housekeeping works are to be carried out as per these international norms/standards like ISO-14001 and OHSAS 18001 for Environment, Health and Safety, as applicable, and in such a manner that all premises always look neat and clean. Eco friendly chemicals/reagents to the extent possible shall be used. Similarly, the waste disposal is also carried out in totally sealed manner without affecting the Environment. For all Chemicals/Reagents, which are to be used, material safety data sheets will be required to be submitted'. Clause 3.0 of the General Conditions of Contract, 2014, stipulates that 'Cleaning and Housekeeping Machineries/Equipments etc. - The machine and equipment provided for cleaning and housekeeping should have adequate capacities in such manner that all cleaning and housekeeping operations are comfortably completed during non-operational hours and during shift hours'.

23. When such conditions are prescribed by the Indian Railways in the General Conditions of Contract, 2014, this Court is unable to understand that even after engaging the Contractors, why such frequent complaints are received from the passengers and the uncomfortableness during travelling are also frequently experienced by the passengers at large.

24. When such stringent conditions are prescribed in the General Conditions of Contract, 2014, this Court is of a reasonable doubt that the Executives are not implementing the General Conditions of Contract by conducting proper inspections during the time of execution of the contract by the Contractors and their employees. It is not sufficient that a tender notification is issued and the successful bidder was appointed to carryout the cleaning job. It is equally important that the Executives/Competent Authorities are bound to monitor and ensure that the procedures contemplated and the cleaning materials to be used are strictly and scrupulously followed by such Contractors.

25. This Court would like to ask one question. If the Chambers of the General Manager or the Higher Officials of the Southern Railways are maintained excellently and in a luxurious manner, at least the minimum level of cleanliness must be provided to the passengers, who all are the persons paying to the Indian Railways and travelling in trains. From and out of the revenue earned from these passengers, the Indian Railways are functioning and the Officials are receiving salary. Thus, they are accountable and answerable to the passengers, who all are travelling in trains, the Authorities Competent, cannot simply shirk their responsibility in these aspects.

26. Maintaining such cleanliness, in order to protect the health of the passengers, is a constitutional mandate. Article 21 stipulates 'protection of life and personal liberty - No person shall be deprived of his life'. When such an unhealthy atmosphere is maintained in Indian Railways, despite the fact that ticket fares are collected from the passengers, and as per the demand of the Railways, then every passenger has got a right to claim cleanliness to be maintained in Railway Coaches and in the platforms. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, time and again reiterated that 'Health' is an integral part of Article 21.

27. Protection of life includes providing decent health related facilities and good environments to live peacefully and healthily. When such is the scope of the Fundamental Right ensured under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, maintenance of cleanliness, in order to protect the health of the passengers, is also to be construed as an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Every passenger has got right to claim cleanliness at the reasonable level and at least as per the norms prescribed by the Indian Railways in their Rules and Regulations. If that is not provided, then this Court is of an opinion that the Authorities Competent must be held accountable and answerable and certainly a personal liability on the part of the officials are to be fixed.

28. Indian Railways are functioning with fantastic Regulations, Rules and the Procedures. Our Great Nation is administered with good laws. However, we find the Officials/Executives are not implementing the same in its letter and spirit and to the satisfaction of the citizen at large. When the Indian Railways had already issued the norms, procedures and the standards to be maintained inside the Railway Coaches and in the platforms, it is duty mandatory on the part of the Officials/ Competent Authorities to ensure that the standards and norms are maintained by all concerned, including the Contractors. The Contractors are paid to carryout such jobs as per the terms and conditions. Such being the factum, the authorities should ensure that those Contractors appointed to perform certain duties and responsibilities are performing their duties to the expectation of the passengers and as per the terms and conditions stipulated by the Indian Railways and the Southern Railway in particular.

29. Large number of passengers are making serious complaints about the cleanliness being maintained by the Southern Railway, both inside the Railway Coaches and in the Railway Stations. Most of the Railway Coaches are filled with cockroaches and free movement of rats, especially during night hours. Children, sick and aged people are mostly travelling in trains. If these complaints are not addressed, monitored and controlled properly by the authorities competent, then they are liable to be prosecuted and suitable actions are to be initiated by the Southern Railway against all those officials concerned under the Discipline and Appeal Rules.

30. There are Supervisors and Higher Officials, who monitor the performance of these Contractors, who all are appointed by the Southern Railway. This Court wants to raise a doubt whether those officials are functioning or not, and those officials are performing their duties and responsibilities as warranted under the Rules. In the absence of performing such duties and responsibilities to the expectation of the passengers and as per the Rules in force, they are liable to be prosecuted and suitable disciplinary proceedings are to be initiated against all those superior officials, who failed to monitor these aspects, more specifically, the cleanliness, both inside the Railway Coaches as well as in the Railway platforms.

31. The most common complaints by the passengers while travelling in trains are that the bedsheets in AC compartments are neither washed at all or washed improperly. The bedsheets and pillows supplied are smelly and not in accordance with the standards prescribed. During night hours, the passengers are disturbed and became panic on account of movement of cockroaches and rats inside the Coaches. Sometimes, the safety provided to the passengers are also inadequate. The staffs in the running trains are not co-operating in respect of certain issues and they are showing insensitiveness in respect of such complaints. When these all are the common complaints frequently noticed and on account of these the passengers are suffering while travelling in trains, no actions are taken for many years by the Southern Railway. The insensitiveness shown by these employees and officials are to be deprecated. They are duty bound to react immediately. However, they are failing in their duty to honour the commitments provided to the passengers, who all are travelling. When these facts are revealed, openly and through press and media on many occasions, there is no improvement in maintaining the standards in respect of these complaints. Thus, this Court is bound to take serious note of these lapses as it involves the rights of the citizen and also the health and peaceful travelling as ensured under the Constitution of India.

32. This Court with pain place on record that the Heads of the Southern Railways and other Higher Level Officials are leading a luxurious life at the cost of passengers. Very decent salaries are paid, perquisites and facilities are many to these officials. Their own Chambers and Residences are maintained as per the standards prescribed by the Railways. However, they failed to monitor the same standards and the norms in respect of the passengers, who all are paying to the Southern Railway and travelling in trains.

33. The posh accommodations offered to these Higher Officials are having sophisticated Railway Officiers Club, Indoor Auditoriums, Indoor Games and Officers' Mess etc. When such facilities are being enjoyed by these officials at the cost of the public and at the cost of the taxpayers, they are bound to be committed to the public at large and, in particular, to the Railways. There cannot be any compromise in this regard. They must have commitments towards the performance of their job. This Court is not questioning the facilities and the salaries provided to these officials. They are entitled for their rights. Equally they are duty bound to perform their corresponding duties. The rights and duties are corresponding terms and inseparable.

34. The Railway Employees Unions are bound to think about conducting meetings and if necessary classes in respect of performance of duties and responsibilities by their respective members in the interest of the passengers and the public at large. When these Unions are agitating for the rights of the employees, equally, they have got duty to ensure that the members of the Unions are performing their duties and responsibilities with commitment and with devotion to duty.

35. The officials have to act with self-conscious. The Railway employees are frequently declaring strikes and conducting Dharnas and agitations. Equally, they should think if these passengers started agitating in large scale on account of such inefficiency and inadequate facilities provided by these Railways, despite the fact that the passengers are paying and travelling, what will be the result?. Thus, every employees, who all are claiming their rights through agitations, strikes and other modes should equally responsible and think about their duties and responsibilities and commitments towards the public, particularly to the passengers and to the Railways.

36. Undoubtedly, Indian Railway is providing services in our Great Nation. However, the services are to be provided to the expectation of the passengers as well as in accord with the terms and conditions and as per the Rules in force. When the officials are going for inspection by way of Special Trains, the Railway Coaches are maintained to such an extent that it is not only clean, but it is maintained with utmost care. At least, the minimum cleanliness and the materials to be used for cleaning purposes are to be ensured in respect of passengers trains as well as in the platforms. This Court is of an opinion that passengers are the important visitors to the Railways. Thus, they are not only be respected and they must be provided with decent facility and clean environments, both inside the Railway Coaches as well as in the Railway platforms.

37. It is made clear that, periodical inspections by the higher officials are certainly imminent. During the periodical inspections, if these lapses are found, then the authorities are bound to initiate disciplinary action against all officials, who all are responsible and accountable for such commissions and omissions. As far as the present writ petitions are concerned, this court is of an opinion that, the writ petitioner failed on his part to comply with the terms and conditions stipulated both in the general conditions of contract 2014 as well as the conditions stipulated in the letter of acceptance.

38. Already the process of re-tender has been commenced and notification was issued by the Southern Railway in this regard and the same was cancelled on account of the interim order granted by this Court in the present writ petition. Adopting a pragmatic approach and to maintain a balance between the interest of the writ petitioner, interest of the Southern Railway and the public interest at large. This Court is of an opinion that, a fresh tender is to be called for and the same must be concluded within a short span and by following the procedures contemplated. There cannot be any further delay in respect of concluding fresh re-tender to be notified and to be concluded. The writ petitioner is also entitled to participate in the fresh tender to be called for and the procedures are to be followed strictly and scrupulously.

39. Lastly, this Court would like to remind the words of Mahatma Gandhi:

"A customer is the most important visitor on our premises, he is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him. He is not an interruption in our work. He is the purpose of it. He is not an outsider in our business. He is part of it. We are not doing him a favor by serving him. He is doing us a favour by giving us an opportunity to do so."

40. Accordingly, the following directions are issued:-

(i) The impugned order, passed by the second respondent in proceedings dated 09.04.2018, stands confirmed.<

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

br /> (ii) The respondents are directed to proceed with the re-tender notification and process the same by following the procedures, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and conclude the entire tender process at the earliest possible, and without causing any undue delay. (iii) The writ petitioner in the present writ petitions is at liberty to participate in the re-tender process and his case also shall be considered along with all other participants as per the Rules in force. (iv) The General Manager, Souther Railway is directed to conduct an enquiry in respect of the tender earlier conducted and if any wrongful decisions were taken or if any procedures had been violated, then suitable departmental disciplinary proceedings are to be initiated against all the officials, who all are responsible for such lapses, negligence and dereliction of duty. (v) The General Manager, Southern Railway is directed to fix the duties and responsibilities to the officials/employees in respect of maintenance of Railway Coaches, both inside and outside as well as the Railway platforms. (vi) In the event of any failure, lapses, negligence or dereliction of duty on the part of the officials/employees, suitable departmental disciplinary proceedings are to be initiated against all such officials under the Discipline and Appeal Rules. (vii) The General Manager, Southern Railway is directed to provide exclusive telephone numbers for the benefit of the passengers and other persons concerned, enabling them to register complaints and provide informations in respect of uncleanliness or other related issues, both inside the trains as well as in the Railway Stations. (viii) The General Manager, Southern Railway is directed to widely publish/display the telephone numbers, in bold letters, both inside the trains and in platforms, enabling the passengers and the persons concerned, to register their complaints without any difficulty. (ix) In the event of any complaint/information from the passengers or the persons concerned, the General Manager, Southern Railway is bound to ensure suitable actions against all the officials, who all are responsible for the maintenance of the coaches as well as the Railway Stations in Southern Railway. (x) The General Manager, Southern Railway is directed to constitute Special Teams consist of the officials with proven integrity and honesty for conducting inspections and monitor the cleanliness, food safety and security of the passengers in all respects. (xi) The General Manager, Southern Railway is directed to issue consolidated instructions/circulars to all the Departments of Southern Railway containing all the above directions, enabling the officials to implement the same without fail. 37. With the above directions, the writ petitions stand disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to The General Manager, Southern Railway, Chennai-3. Registry is directed to list the matter 'For Reporting Compliance' after 12 weeks.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

03-08-2020 Premier Limited Versus Union of India &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
13-07-2020 Premier Employees &amp; Another Versus State of Maharashtra &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
03-03-2020 Mangala Yuvaraj Nakade, Mumbai &amp; Another Versus M/s. Shree Basveshwara Agro Foods Processing Ltd. &amp; Others, Bengaluru National Company Law Tribunal Bengaluru
20-02-2020 M/s. Premier Garment Processing, Rep. by its Proprietor, Ibrahim Shah V/S The Divisional Railway Manager, Southern Railway, Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-02-2020 Punjab National Bank V/S Sri Vaishnodevi Cashew Processing (P) Ltd. and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Cuttack
23-01-2020 M/s. Premier Cotton Textiles rep. by its Senior Manager, S. Vaidyanathan &amp; Others Versus The Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Coimbatore Commissionerate, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-01-2020 Union of India rep. By its Enforcement Officer Enforcement Directorate Chennai Versus M/s. Raiments &amp; Garments International, Chennai &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-01-2020 The General Manager, Aleppy Parcel Service, Alappuzha Versus Anil Kumar V., Managing Partner, Wetex Garments, Poovattuparamba, Kozhikode Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
22-11-2019 The Management Scotts Garments Limited, Trippur Versus The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore &amp; Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-11-2019 M/s. Premier Distilleries (P) Ltd., Represented by its Manager K. Sundaram, Pondicherry Versus The Labour Court, Pondicherry &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-11-2019 Premier Marine Products, Represented by its Authoritsed Signatory, Abdul Razzak Ganj Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Additional), Thiruvanmiyur Assessment Circle, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-10-2019 Premier Capital Services Ltd. &amp; Others Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India, SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
14-10-2019 M/s. PJS Knit Garments, Rep.by its Partner, P. Sugansaran &amp; Another Versus The Authorised Officer, Bank of Baroda, Tirupur Main Branch, Tirupur High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-09-2019 National Federation of Farmers Procurement, Processing &amp; Retailing Cooperatives of India Limited (NACOF), Manager Ramjeet Satyarthi Versus The Commissioner, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-08-2019 M/S Premier Car Sales Ltd. Shahnazaf Road Lko.Throu. Director Versus Commissioner Of Central Excise &amp; Service Tax Ashok Marg Lko High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
06-08-2019 M/s. Indo Skins Garments Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, N. Thiagarajan, Chennai Versus The Presiding Officer, Chennai &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2019 The Officer In Charge, Sub-Regional Provident Fund Office &amp; Another Versus M/s Godavari Garments Limited Supreme Court of India
24-07-2019 M/s. Premier Cotton Textiles, represented by its Senior Manager, S. Vaidyanathan, Poolankinar Post, Udumalpet Versus The Commissioner of Central Goods &amp; Service Tax, Coimbatore Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, Coimbatore &amp; Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-06-2019 M/s. India Metal One Steel Plate Processing Private Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 2 (2) High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-04-2019 The District Collector, Kanchipuram Versus M/s. Gupta Garments, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory Anil Gupta &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2019 M/s. Ginni Garments &amp; Another Versus M/s. Sethi Garments &amp; Others High Court of Punjab and Haryana
04-04-2019 Ginni Garments and Others V/S Sethi Garments and Others. In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
01-04-2019 Narendra Kumar Dhoot Versus M/s. Premier Ltd. &amp; Others National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
01-04-2019 Narendra Kumar Dhoot V/S Premier Ltd. and Others. NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (NEW DELHI)
14-03-2019 M/s. SCM Textile Processing Mills, Erode Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-03-2019 The Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer, Southern Railway, Salem Division &amp; Others Versus M/s. Premier Garments Processing, Rep. by its Proprietor Ibrahim Sha, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-03-2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Premier Finance &amp; Trading Co. Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
29-01-2019 Union of India & Others Versus M/s Premier Limited (Formerly Premier Automobiles Ltd.) & Others Supreme Court of India
02-01-2019 Management of the Barara Cooperative Marketing-cum-Processing Society Ltd. Versus Workman Pratap Singh Supreme Court of India
21-12-2018 Batra Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-12-2018 Goodluck Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise &amp; Cus., Surat-II High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
10-12-2018 Tvl.S.C.M. Textile Processing Mills, Represented by its Partner, N.K. Nandhugopal, Tirupur Versus The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Tirupur South Assessment Circle, Tirupur & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-11-2018 M/s. Premier Book Co, New Delhi Versus Cit, New Delhi Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi
14-11-2018 Commissioner of Central Excise, Dibrugarh Versus M/s. Arunachal Iron & Steel Fabrication & Chemical Processing Unit Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal East Regional Bench Kolkata
29-10-2018 Caravel Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Premier Sea Foods Exim Pvt. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
08-10-2018 Himachal Pradesh Horticultural, Produce Marketing & Processing Corporation Limited, Chennai Versus The Commissioner, Thiruvallur & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-09-2018 Ito Ward 5, Pondicherry Versus Ms. Central Co Op Processing Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai
10-08-2018 State Bank of India, (Retail Assets Central Processing Centre), Rep by its Chief Manager, Sunil Kumar Choudhary Versus District Magistrate & District Collector, Thiruvallur & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2018 Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd., (Now ECGC Limited), Chennai & Another Versus Zoro Garments Private Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, N.F. Mogrella High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2018 Bord for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (B.I.F.R.) Versus Coromandel Garments Ltd. & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
13-07-2018 M/s. Rasathe Garments, Rep by its Partner, Virudhunagar Versus The Commercial Tax Officer-I, Virudhunagar High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2018 M/s. Premier Mills Pvt.Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director K.V. Srinivasan Versus The Chairman, Board of Approvals, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-05-2018 Rajasthan Prime Steel Processing Centre Private Limited V/S CCE & ST, Alwar Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi
04-04-2018 M/s. Sri Rengas Avitta Garments, Represented by its Partner, R. Rajaram & Another Versus R. Indira High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2018 Kandukuri Garments Versus Inspector of Legal Metrology High Court of Karnataka
12-03-2018 Meenachil Rubber Marketing & Processing Co-Operative Society Ltd. No. K 118, Represented by Managing Director, Kottayam & Another Versus The Choondachery Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. 167, Represented by Its Secretary, Kottayam & Another High Court of Kerala
08-03-2018 Kanti Commercials Pvt. Ltd. Versus Belthangady Taluk Rubber Growers Marketing & Processing Co-Operative Society Limited National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
12-02-2018 M/s. Premier Instruments & Controls Ltd., Coimbatore Versus Customs Excise Service Tax, Appellate Tribunal, Shastri Bhavan, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-01-2018 A. Velumurugan Versus M/s. Sree Shiva Sakthi Garments, Represented by its Partner Venkatachalam, Tiruppur High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-11-2017 Premier Associates, Rep. By its partner S. Arivalagan Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Service Tax Division & Others High Court of Karnataka
12-10-2017 M/s. Premier Distilleries (P) Ltd., Rep. By its Manager K. Sundaram, Pondicherry Versus The Labour Court, Pondicherry & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-10-2017 Flacon Tyres Ltd. Versus Belthangady Taluk Rubber Growers Marketing & Processing Co-op. Society Ltd. & Another National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
22-09-2017 Premier Industries India Ltd V/S C.C.E., Indore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi
18-09-2017 M/S. Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd, Represented by its Regional Manager, Chennai & Another Versus Saptagiri Fiji Fruit Processing Pvt. Ltd., Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-09-2017 Premier Rolling and Forging Works (P) Ltd V/S C.C.E. & S.T., Raipur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
14-09-2017 Premier Rolling and Forging Works Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
29-08-2017 P.M. Mathew, Former President, Kaduthuruthy Co-Operative Rubber Marketing & Processing Society Ltd. Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor & Others High Court of Kerala
25-08-2017 Abijith S. Nair Versus State Bank of India, Represented by its Chief Manager, Retail Assets Centralized Processing Centre, Palarivattom, Ernakulam & Others Debts Recovery Tribunal Ernakulam
24-08-2017 V. Alex Mansingh Versus The Authorised officer, State Bank of India, Retail Asset Central Processing Centre, Chennai &amp; Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-08-2017 SBI Life Insurance Co.Ltd., Central Processing Unit & Another Versus D. Padma & Another Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
17-08-2017 Willis Processing Services (India) Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Service Tax-VII, Mumbai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
01-08-2017 Design Worx Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Premier Restaurants Private Ltd. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
26-07-2017 Creative Garments Pvt. Ltd V/S C.C.E. & S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad
17-07-2017 Narela Food Processing Industries Welfare Association (Regd.) Versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
05-07-2017 R. Sathyanarayanan Versus The State Bank of India, Rep. by its Chief Manager, Retail Assets Central Processing Centre (RACPC), Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-07-2017 The Choondacherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No.K.167, Represented by its Secretary Versus The Meenachil Rubber Marketing & Processing Co-Operative Society Ltd., Represented By Managing Director, Pala & Others High Court of Kerala
27-06-2017 National Federation of Farmer Procurement, Processing and Retailing Co-operative of India Limited (NACOF) Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
09-06-2017 M/s. Premier Garment Proceeding Rep by Proprietor Ibrahim Shah Versus The Divisional Railway Manager Southern Railway Salem Division, Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-06-2017 Total Sports &amp; Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd Versus Premier Brands P. Ltd High Court of Judicature at Bombay
01-06-2017 The Premier Benefit Fund Ltd., Represented by its Chairman and Managing Director Versus G. Shanta & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-05-2017 Tata Steel Processing & Distribution Ltd. Versus Ideb Projects Pvt. Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
13-04-2017 Premier Evolvics Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore & Another Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
10-03-2017 Mother Dairy Foods Processing Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Export), Mumbai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
10-03-2017 Mother Dairy Foods Processing Ltd V/S Commr. of Cus. (Export) Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
03-03-2017 Premier Cotton Textiles V/S Commissioner of C. Ex., Coimbatore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
13-02-2017 Premier Ltd. & Another Versus The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
10-02-2017 The Management of Foundation Garments Pvt. Ltd. Represented by its Managing Director ?Divine Grace? Versus Government of Tamil Nadu Labour & Employment (A1) Department, Represented by its Principal Secretary High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-02-2017 M/s. Premier Poly Processors Pvt. Ltd. Versus Lrs. Of Modi Lal (Since deceased) & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
19-01-2017 R.K. Rajkumar Proprietor M/s. Koghima Garments Versus The Registrar Debts Recovery Tribunal - III Spencer Towers Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-01-2017 Kitex Garments Ltd., represented by its Managing Director-Sabu M. Jacob Versus State of Kerala, represented by Principal Secretary To Government, Taxes (H) Department & Another High Court of Kerala
06-01-2017 Gaurav Monga Versus Premier Inn India Pvt. Ltd. & Others High Court of Delhi
02-01-2017 Sonal Garments V/S Commr. of Cus., Seaport (Import), Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
23-12-2016 M/s. Ruby Textiles Processing Ltd by its Partner R. Udhaya Chandhirika & Another Versus S.P. Rotary Prints, a registered partnership firm Rep by its Partners & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-10-2016 The Secretary, District Horticultural Produce Growers Co-Op. Marketing & Processing Society Ltd. Karnataka Versus Nagappa & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-10-2016 UCO Bank, Branch Balotra, through its Branch Manager Versus M/s. Ramdeo Processing Works High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
15-09-2016 The Project Manager, Cattle & Poultry Feed Processing Plant, Orissa Agro Industries Corp. Ltd., BBSR. Versus P.O., Labour Court, Bhubaneswar & Another High Court of Orissa
15-09-2016 M/s. Rasathe Garments Versus The Commercial Tax Officer-I (FAC) Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
02-09-2016 Carol Garments & Another Versus The Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Coimbatore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-08-2016 S.S.M. Processing Mills Ltd., & Others Versus M/s. V.N.Ayyadurai High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-08-2016 Vivek Gajanan Palandurkar & Others Versus Vidarbha Premier Co-operative Housing Society Limited & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
21-07-2016 M/s. Premier Automobiles Ltd. Versus M. Abdul Latheef & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
08-07-2016 M/s. Premier Agro Industries Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-07-2016 Dr.K. Kandasamy Versus Mahalakshmi Metal & Scrap Processing Pvt. Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-06-2016 M/s. Oxygen the Digital Shop, Pulimoottil Arcade, Kottayam & Another Versus Namadevan.L., Anna Garments & Others Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
02-05-2016 Premier Heavy Engineering Coprn. Versus Commr. Of Central Excise High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
12-02-2016 M/s. Anjal Garments Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-01-2016 M/s Premier Agro Industries Versus The New India Assurance Company Limited Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Panchkula
13-01-2016 Premier Foods (PTY) Ltd. Versus Norman Manoim No & Others Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
15-12-2015 Tata Steel Processing & Distribution Ltd. Versus MPP Technologies Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
08-12-2015 Premier Road Carriers Limited Versus Siemens Limited High Court of Judicature at Bombay