Friday 2 January 2009

New Delhi Railway Tenders

NEW DELHI: The Centre's policy of providing reservation to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and minorities in commercial contracts has come under Supreme Court scanner. The apex court has asked the Centre to explain why preferential treatment


A Bench comprising Justice BN Agrawal and Justice PP Naolekar on Monday admitted a petition challenging the government's preferential treatment to such groups in the name of affirmative action while awarding catering tenders within the world's largest commercial and utility employer. The court issued notices to the Centre and others on the plea of Railway Catering Contractors' Association.

The court also directed continuation of its interim order. It had restrained the railway authorities from finalising the tenders. However, they could invite the bidding. Senior counsel Harish Salve, who appeared for the petitioner association, termed the government policy of extending reservation on matters of purely commercial transaction as "illegal and unconstitutional".

The court wanted to know from Attorney General, Milon K Banerjee, who represented the Centre, that under which provision of the Constitution, the government was going ahead with its reservation policy concerning purely commercial transactions. The court then glanced through the constitutional provisions that deal with government power on quotas. But it wondered if such a policy can be extended in the economic realm.

"Article 16 provides for reservation in public employment. Article 15 (5) deals with policy of reservation in education. Similarly, the state is empowered to come up with special provision for the advancement for SCs, STs and OBCs," the SC noted. "But does awarding of commercial contracts fall within any of the above-mentioned articles?" it asked.

Furthermore, the court took exception to the policy of reservation to the minorities in the government's commercial transactions. "Under which constitutional provision, you (Centre) are giving preferential treatment to minorities in commercial matters?" the court sought to know from the country's top law official.

When the AG replied that the government contracts were related to the services, the court said services and matters related to services were two different things. The AG also cited the Bombay High Court verdict relating to the dismissal of the plea of the appellant association. The court maintained that the issue had come up before it perhaps for the first time, as pointed out by Salve, and it wanted to know which constitutional provision allows reservation on commercial matters.

Following the query, the AG sought time to file reply. The court granted six weeks to the Centre and others while admitting the petition. Mr Salve then drew to the court's attention that the issue in question was significant and has come up for the first time before it. Though Balco case has economic undertones, it's mainly confined to the mining matter, Mr Salve contended.

No comments:

Rail Employment News