The Delhi High Court has dismissed a batch of intra-court appeals filed by railway catering licensees seeking extension of their license period on account of losses suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic, holding that no such extension can be claimed as a matter of right when contracts were entered into post-pandemic.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia upheld the earlier Single Judge’s decision rejecting the writ petitions. The Court noted that the appellants had entered into Master License Agreements after the onset of COVID-19 and were fully aware of its impact on footfall at railway stations.

Rejecting the plea for parity with similarly placed licensees who were granted limited extensions, the Court held that those cases pertained to contracts executed prior to the pandemic. In contrast, the present appellants had consciously entered into agreements during the pandemic and had already availed benefits such as reduced license fees.

The Bench further ruled that there was no compulsion on the appellants to execute the contracts, and the argument that refusal would have led to blacklisting was untenable. It emphasised that contractual terms clearly stipulated a fixed tenure of five years with no provision for extension or renewal, which the appellants had accepted.

The Court also rejected reliance on the Supreme Court’s orders extending limitation during COVID-19, clarifying that such directions applied only to judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings and could not be invoked to extend contractual periods.

Noting that the license period had already expired and the stalls had been vacated, with re-tendering underway, the Court found no basis to grant any relief. Accordingly, the appeals were dismissed and the impugned judgment was upheld.