THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.9793 of 2010 ORDER: The Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited, the 1st respondent herein, issued a tender notice dated 03-02-2009, inviting tenders for establishment of catering and fruit juice stalls at various places. Fruit juice stall at Warangal Station was also notified, under category-A. The petitioner, the 4th respondent and certain others submitted tenders. The 4th respondent was awarded the contract through proceedings dated 23-11-2009. Thereafter, it was permitted to run the fruit juice stall in Platform Nos.2 and 3, vide proceedings dated 02-12-2009, issued by the Area Manager of the 1st respondent. The petitioner challenges the said proceedings. According to the petitioner, no dealer was selected in pursuance of the tender notice, and there was absolutely no justification for the respondents 1 to 3 in permitting the 4th respondent to run the stalls on Platform Nos. 2 and 3. The respondents 1 to 3 filed a detailed counter-affidavit. It is stated that the 4th respondent was selected in the process, and it was permitted to run the stalls on Platform Nos. 2 and 3, as a consequence of shifting of some stalls from platform No.1 to platform Nos.2 and 3, for administrative reasons. It is stated that the modification of the station building is in progress. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner is under the impression that no agency was selected for establishment of fruit juice stall at Warangal Station, in pursuance of the tender notice dated 03-02-2009. The record, however, discloses that the 4th respondent was selected, so much so, it has deposited the requisite amounts, and was issued written orders. The permission accorded to the 4th respondent to establish the stall on platform Nos.2 and 3 is purely on the grounds of administrative convenience. It is stated that the stall-works are undertaken on platform No.1, and that the notification does not restrict the business of a selected agency, to a particular platform. At any rate, the petitioner does not have any locus standi to challenge the impugned proceedings, since it is not the lessee to run the fruit juice stall, at any place in the station. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.06-04-2011. KO