Ms Occean Pearl Exports Private Limited And ANR v. The Regional Executive Director And ANR

CB 01 25.09.2025 d.p.

Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Port Blair Appellate Jurisdiction (From the Principal Bench) W.P.A No. 459 of 2025 MS Occean Pearl Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

-versus- The Regional Executive Director & Anr.

Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ...For the Petitioners.

Ms. A. S. Zinu.

...For the Respondents.

1.

The petitioners are aggrieved by communication dated 11th September, 2025 by the AGM (Commercial), VSI Airport directing the petitioners not to engage in sale to city customer through aggregator platform such as Swiggy, Zomato etc. as there is no provision mentioned in the RFP to sell through aggregator platforms. The petitioners have been allowed to sell products to the airport users only.

2.

According to the petitioners, the impugned communication has been made without granting any opportunity of hearing. By the impugned communication, the right of the petitioners to sell products has been curtailed.

3.

Reference has been made to the definition and interpretation in the RFP wherein 'concessioned premises' includes the location within the terminal and city side of the airport as per the approved layout plan.

4.

The petitioners assert that the expression city side of the airport would allow the petitioners an opportunity to sell products through the aggregators. 5.

Prayer has been made to restrain the authority from implementing the impugned communication. 6.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent authority raises an issue with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition.

7.

It has been submitted that there is a provision for mediation in dispute redressal mechanism mentioned in the contract itself.

8.

It has further been submitted that petitioners are relying upon the aggregators who are outsiders entering into the airport premises where the entry is made with permission.

9.

I have heard the submissions made on behalf of the parties.

10. Admittedly it appears that there is a contract in between petitioners and respondents.

The impugned communication raises a dispute which is required to be resolved as per the dispute resolution mechanism incorporated in the contract.

11. The contract mentions that all disputes at the first instance shall be referred to Mediation Committee of independent experts or individual mediator for mediation as per AAI Mediation Policy and applicable laws.

12. Whether the service provided by the petitioners to the aggregators would fall within the terms and conditions of the contract or not is required to be adjudicated.

13. The petitioners allege that opportunity of hearing was not granted to them prior to passing the impugned order.

14. The writ court, at this stage, would not like to exercise the power of judicial review in a contractual matter.

15. The petitioners are granted liberty to avail the dispute resolution mechanism incorporated in the contract.

16. In the event the petitioners approach the Committee, then the Committee shall take steps to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners for passing interim stay of direction mentioned in impugned communication at the earliest but positively within a period of four weeks from the date of approaching the Committee.

17. The writ petition stands disposed of.

18. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

19. Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties.

( Amrita Sinha, J )