SC urges Railways to take corrective action on Mumbai CST's catering stalls

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

The Supreme Court recently said the Railways required immediate corrective steps for the "lapses" in the management of catering stalls at the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus in Mumbai.

Observing administrative lapses on the part of IRCTC, a bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and Aravind Kumar said a Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) report filed over the matter indicated "serious negligence" on the part of its divisional officials.

The top court said the CVC report should be examined by the Railway administration and placed before competent authorities for action and corrective measures within a month and three months, respectively.

"The report of the CVC is required to be implemented on the part of the Railways," it said on January 21.

Though the CVC indicated no "mens rea" to initiate criminal action while only indicating negligence on part of the officials, the court underlined the utilisation of "immediate corrective measures" by the Railways to remedy lapses and improve IRCTC's administrative functioning and services.

The court was acting on an appeal filed by the CBI against a Bombay High Court order.

The May 3 2017 dismissal order by the high court came on a CBI challenge to a 2013 order of the special judge on the complaint of RTI activist Ajay B Bose.

Bose alleged seven Central Railway officials committed massive fraud and siphoned off crores of rupees, causing huge losses to the exchequer.

The alleged fraud, he said, was carried out by undervaluing the sales of vends, depositing less amount in Railways than actually generated, overcharging the articles and allowing them to operate without valid licenses, in violation of the Railway Catering Policy.

The special judge directed the CBI to carry out investigation in the matter.

Appearing for Bose, advocate Akash Vashishtha argued the CVC report pointed out massive and extensive irregularities in the functioning of the Railway authorities and officials, who were directly overseeing the affairs.

"The report, in fact, vindicates the contents of the complaint. The observations made in the Report say that there had been complaints against the licensees and that they failed to pay the license fees despite repeated notices," he argued.