JUDGMENT :

VINEET SARAN, J.

The petitioner is a registered Company carrying on the business of steel and power manufacturing.

2. Under the scheme of the opposite party-Railways, known as Wagon Investment Scheme (WIS), which was introduced and published on 31.3.2005, the petitioner entered into an agreement with the opposite party-Railways on 26.12.2006 and in terms of the Scheme, the date of commencement of the agreement was to be 13.02.2007, as the petitioner was provided with the wagons under the scheme only on that date. The period of the agreement was admittedly ten years, which is to expire on 12.02.2017. The petitioner has been using their wagons in terms of the Scheme. It is now aggrieved by the interpretation given with regard to admissibility of WIS benefits to 3rd party for movement of their consignments in WIS rakes by the General Circular dated 17.09.2013, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Railways. By this Circular, Railways has interpreted the word ‘assign’ as used in the Scheme, and thereafter gone further to say that the assignment of rake to third party will defeat the basic purpose of Scheme. In the present case, the petitioner claims that it is not assigning the wagons to third party, but the wagons are used by the sister concern of the petitioner, which is permissible under the Scheme as well as the agreement. Challenging the said General Circular dated 17.9.2013, this writ petition has been filed.

3. We have heard Mr. P.Acharya, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. D.Panigrahy, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party-Railways and perused the record. Pleadings between the parties have been exchanged and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

4. The submission of the petitioner is that the General Circular does not apply to the case of the petitioner as the entire scheme does not use the word ‘assign’ which is sought to be interpreted in the aforesaid Circular. It is thus submitted that the business, as has been carried out by the petitioner under the Scheme and as per the agreement between the parties, should be permitted to be carried on, ignoring the aforesaid Circular as the word ‘assign’ may have been used in the agreement in the context where any of the party does not survive, which is not so in the present case, yet the opposite parties are making the Circular applicable in the case of the petitioner.

5. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Railways, however, admits that the word ‘assign’ has not been used in the entire scheme or policy, and that the word ‘assign’ has been used in the agreement, which is in the context where the party does not survive, and in such an eventuality, its successor or assignee are to be substituted in its place. He however admits that the present case is not a case of succession.

6. The objectives of the Scheme have been given in para 1.0 and the eligibility criteria in para 2.0 and 2.1 of the said scheme, which are reproduced below:

“1.0 -Objective :

In order to encourage public-private partnership in procurement of wagons to meet with the anticipated incremental freight traffic in the coming years, Hon’ble Minister for Railways, while presenting the Railway Budget 2005-06 on 26th February, 2005, has announced introduction of a new scheme called “Wagon Investment Scheme” (WIS). Customers investing in Railway wagons will be assured of supply of a guaranteed number of rakes every month based on the number of rakes procured and the turn round of the type of wagons with 10% concession in freight. In addition, two bonus rakes per month will be supplied without freight concession for the types of wagons indicated under para 7.9. Investors opting for Engine on Load (EOL) Scheme will get additional bonus supply of two BG rakes per month without concession in freight. This guaranteed supply will be in addition to normal s