Manmohan, J.

1. Present writ petitions have been filed challenging the termination letters dated 28th September, 2016 passed by the respondent-IRCTC terminating the temporary licences awarded to the petitioner of on-board catering services in train nos.12832-24 and 12365-66 on the ground that the petitioner failed to start the catering service w.e.f. 21st September, 2016 and did not pay the security deposit and licence fee on or before 19th September, 2016. The respondent-IRCTC further in terms of Clause 4.8 of the tender document has debarred the petitioner from participating in future projects of respondent-IRCTC for a period of one year.

2. Mr. Manjit Singh Ahluwalia, learned counsel for the petitioner states that vide three letters dated 16th September, 2016, the respondent-IRCTC awarded temporary licences to the petitioner for three trains and the petitioner was required to deposit the security deposit and licence fee on or before 19th September, 2016. He, however, states that the letters dated 16th September, 2016 were received by the petitioner on 21st September, 2016 and consequently it was impossible for the petitioner to pay the licence fee on or before 19th September, 2016.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that without any show cause notice, the petitioner has been debarred for a period of one year. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Gorkha Security Services Vs. Government (NCT of Delhi) and Others, (2014) 9 SCC 105 wherein it has been held that before imposition of penalty of blacklisting/debarment, the petitioner has to be given a specific notice stating that in the event the authority is not satisfied with the reply it gives, it can be blacklisted/debarred.

4. Mr. Ahluwalia also contends that the tender document itself postulates late payment on behalf of the tenderer. In support of his contention, he relies upon Clause 6.2 of the tender document which reads as under:-

6.2

Failure to deposit License fee – post commissioning of licence

Licensee is required to deposit License Fee, in advance, as advised by IRCTC, for the period of temporary license, extended of IRCTC. In case Licensee fails to deposit the License fee within the stipulated time frame, IRCTC shall charge interest @ 18% per annum calculated for the number of days of default and in case of inordinate delay IRCTC may initiate the termination proceeding to terminate the contract at the risk and cost of licensee.

5. Mr. Ahluwalia lastly states that the punishment of debarment for one year is very harsh in the facts of the present cases. He points out that the petitioner has been an empanelled caterer for the Railways since 2005 and as of today is running five Base Kitchens and is employing two hundred and fifty employees.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-IRCTC states that as the petitioner is an empanelled caterer, it has furnished its email address to the respondent-IRCTC for the purpose of correspondence. He states that in the present case temporary licence of catering for three trains, namely, Amritsar Haridwar Jan Shatabdi, Patna Ranchi Jan Shadabdi and Durg Nizammudin Sampark Kranti Express were issued for short duration.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent-IRCTC also states that the letters of intent dated 16th September, 2016 were sent to the petitioner by email and were received by the petitioner on the same date. He contends that though the last date for making payment for all three trains was 19th September, 2016, yet the petitioner paid the entire licence fee only for Amritsar Haridwar Jan Shatabdi on 20th September, 2016 and for Patna Ranchi Jan Shadabdi in two installments on 20th and 21st September, 2016. He points out that for Durg Nizamuddin Sampark Kranti Express, the