AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Prasoon Sinha for the Patna Municipal Corporation and Mr. Rakesh
Ambastha for the State.
A mobile Fast Food Van under the name of Banjara Fast Food has been directed to remove its van from the premises of Maurya Lok on the
ostensible plea of creating traffic congestion.
Mr. Srivastava, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that no policy has been formulated and the petitioner’s food van has been
handpicked and has been asked to remove the same from the Maurya Lok premises. It has been submitted that this cannot be done on any pretext
whatsoever, even if it be for easing traffic congestion at a prime location in the city of Patna.
The aforesaid argument has further been bolstered up by indicating that there are several other food vans which have been allowed to operate from
the same premises.
Mr. Prasoon Sinha, learned advocate for the Patna Municipal Corporation has very fairly stated that there cannot be any exclusion of one particular
food van. If at all, traffic congestion is the motive for taking such a decision, all the food vans would be required to be removed or a policy is to be
formulated for allowing only certain number of such food vans.
That not having been done, the decision with respect to Banjara Fast Food is absolutely arbitrary and exclusionary, to say the least.
Precisely for this reason, the bench hearing this matter on the last occasion on 05.11.2019 directed the authorities of the Patna Municipal Corporation
to allow the Banjara Fast Food van to operate from the premises of Maurya Lok if other such food outlets have been permitted.
Mr. Prasoon Sinha, learned advocate for the Patna Municipal Corporation has submitted that a policy shall be evolved in order to limit the number of
such fast food windows and under the aforesaid policy, attempt shall be made to provide for de-congestion of traffic by limiting the number of such
fast food centres.
Once such a policy is formulated, necessary sequel action shall be taken and in that event, the petitioner/company shall have no objection if it is not
arbitrarily and the petitioner is not illegally singled out.
In the meantime, status quo shall be maintained. With the aforesaid direction/observation, the writ petition is disposed of.