Authority: High Court at Calcutta (Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction) – Appellate Side

Order Date: 30 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Jekay Wagons Limited (registered as a "Small Enterprise" under the MSME Development Act, 2006) and an associate.
  • Respondents: Union of India and four railway authorities (RDSO, Railway Board, etc.).
  • Background: On 17 September 2025, Ultratech Cement Limited (Respondent No.5) issued a purchase order to Jekay Wagons for one BCFCM1 rake (59 wagons + 3 wagons) with a brake van (BVCM), solar panel and modified interiors, to be delivered EXW JWL, Dhanbad within six months.
  • Certification Process: Jekay sought inclusion of the BCFCM1 wagon category in its G‑105 certificate. RDSO audit teams inspected the manufacturing facilities on 12‑13 November 2025 and 2 December 2025, confirming adequacy and approving the category inclusion.
  • Permissions & Charges: RDSO I&L Kolkata granted permission to start prototype manufacturing on 6 March 2026. Drawing approval charges of Rs. 4,30,700 and inspection charges of Rs. 28,21,380 were deposited on 19 December 2025. RDSO later notified total consultancy, drawing and inspection charges of Rs. 32,52,080.
  • Wagon Numbers Allocation: Railway Board allotted numbers for 62 BCFCM1 wagons and 1 BVCM wagon on 8 April 2026, uploading them to the Indian Railway Wagon Management System (IRWMS) under the Liberalized Special Freight Train Operator (LSFTO) Scheme.
  • Delay in Confirmatory Audit: Although Respondent No.2 (RDSO) reconfirmed inclusion of BCFCM1 under Category‑II on 15 January 2026 and extended the confirmatory audit deadline to 22 July 2026, it later cited that the LSFTO Scheme was not covered by the 2011 G‑105 standards and forwarded the matter to the Railway Board under Clause 1.6, without communicating any decision to the petitioner.
  • Jurisdiction Arguments: Respondent counsel argued lack of territorial jurisdiction, citing mismatched office locations. The Court examined multiple correspondences addressed to the petitioner’s Kolkata office (letters dated 6 March 2026, 15 January 2026, 8 April 2026, 16 July 2026, etc.) and held that these communications formed an integral part of the cause of action, establishing jurisdiction under Article 226(2).
  • Legal Provisions Cited: Article 226(2) of the Constitution; Clause 1.6 of G‑105 Standards (amendment and migration provisions); prior judgments (National Textile Corp. Ltd. vs. Haribox Swalram, Alchemist Ltd. vs. State Bank of Sikkim).

Final Outcome

  • The Court held it had jurisdiction and allowed WPA No. 16204 of 2026.
  • Respondent No.2 (RDSO) and Respondent No.3 (Railway Board) are directed to complete the prototype inspection and confirmatory audit of the BCFCM1 wagon within two (2) weeks from the date of the judgment.
  • Parties may act on the server copy of the judgment posted on the Court’s official website; certified copies can be obtained upon compliance with formalities.

Topics: Court Order; Railway Wagon Certification; LSFTO Scheme