Repeated representations do not extend the period of limitation for filing legal proceedings.

Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.:--

1. This intra court appeal impugns the order dated 13th March, 2014 of the learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal of WP(C) 1643/2014 preferred by the appellant. The appeal is accompanied with applications, for condonation of 5 days delay in filing thereof and of nearly a month in refiling thereof. However being prima facie not satisfied with the merits of the appeal, we, without prejudice to the applications for condonation of delay heard proprietor of the appellant appearing in person at length on merits of the appeal and reserved order.

2. The appellant was awarded a contract by the respondent Railways for booking parcels for carriage in Train No. 2626, Kerala Express from New Delhi to Thiruananthapuram for the period from 19th September, 2007 to 18th September, 2010. The appellant claims that he was entitled to extension of the said contract for a further period of two years and duly applied for such an extension. The respondent Railways however offered to grant the extension on certain conditions, which according to the appellant the respondent Railways was not entitled to impose. The appellant accordingly represented thereagainst and which representation was rejected only on 18th February, 2014

3. The appellant similarly had another contract, the term whereof also expired on 19th January, 2011 and which also was similarly not extended.

4. Aggrieved from the aforesaid, WP(C) No. 1643/2014, from disposal whereof this appeal arises, was filed.

5. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition finding/observing/holding –

(i) that the counsel for the respondent Railways appearing before the learned Single Judge on advance notice had informed that the appellant/writ petitioner had deliberately withheld the letter dated 6th December, 2010 of the respondent Railways informing the appellant/writ petitioner that since he had not accepted the conditions for extension, his contracts were being not extended and receipt of which letter the proprietor of the appellant/writ petitioner present in person before the learned Single Judge had admitted; the counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner informed the learned Single Judge that the proprietor of the appellant/writ petitioner had not informed the counsel also of the said letter dated 6th December, 2010;

(ii) it was further the case of the counsel for the respondent Railways appearing on advance notice before the learned Single Judge that the appellant/writ petitioner had also suppressed from the petition the fact that appellant/writ petitioner had accepted the conditions imposed by the respondent railways for extension of the contract expiring on 19th January, 2011 and on which acceptance the said contract had been extended for a period of two years or till finalization of fresh tender and which term was also accepted by the appellant/writ petitioner;

(iii) the counsel for the respondent railways appearing on advance notice before the learned Single Judge had further informed that a fresh contract had already been granted to a third party and the period whereof also had expired on 21st February, 2014 and the respondent Railways was taking steps for inviting fresh tender and the appellant/writ petitioner was not entitled to any relief on this account also;

(iv) that the appellant/writ petitioner having suppressed the said material facts from the writ petition, was not entitled to any discretionary relief.

Accordingly the petition was dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000/-.

6. The argument of the proprietor of the petitioner is that though admittedly he had not mentioned the aforesaid facts (in the writ petition) which were disclosed by the counsel for the respondent Railways but the same were evident from a perusal of other documents filed by the appellant/writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge and thus he could not be accused of concealment or suppression and be held disentitled to the relief on this ground. He has in this regard taken