RoshanSpace files legal petition against alleged unfair allocation of railway advertising sites
The petition raises serious allegations that Indian Railways has bypassed the usual process of open, competitive bidding, traditionally used for awarding public contracts, in favor of private negotiations for the allocation of advertising sites.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mumbai-based outdoor advertising company RoshanSpace Brandcom has filed a legal petition challenging the allocation of railway hoarding sites under the New, Innovative Non-Fare Revenue Ideas Scheme (NINFRIS), citing concerns over fairness, transparency, and adherence to policy guidelines. The petition raises serious allegations that Indian Railways has bypassed the usual process of open, competitive bidding, traditionally used for awarding public contracts, in favor of private negotiations for the allocation of advertising sites. RoshanSpace contends that this lack of transparency undermines fair competition and may violate Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the law.
Originally designed to test unproven methods for generating non-fare revenue, NINFRIS is intended to allocate railway advertising sites to agencies that meet certain innovative criteria. However, RoshanSpace argues that the landholdings under this scheme have been distributed without proper justification or adherence to its stated goals. The company points to several instances where advertising permissions have been granted without consideration for technical feasibility, visibility, or public safety concerns, such as obstructed views, interference with railway signage, and failure to meet mandated distances between hoardings.
As per the media reports, the petition also highlights discrepancies in the duration of contracts under the scheme. While the policy stipulates a one-year contract, extendable for an additional year, RoshanSpace claims that the railways have arbitrarily extended some contracts to five years, thereby violating the terms of NINFRIS. Additionally, the regular tenders for these sites are being awarded for five years, creating an uneven playing field and limiting opportunities for fair competition.
Another significant concern raised by RoshanSpace is the allocation of over 35 solar-powered billboards to a single entity under the pretext of solar initiatives. This allocation is being questioned due to its concentration in areas where other billboards already exist, further skewing the fairness of the process. Moreover, the decision to convert static solar-powered billboards into digital ones is in conflict with NINFRIS’ guidelines, with RoshanSpace arguing that the energy demands of digital billboards, approximately 26 times greater than static ones, make them unfeasible under the scheme’s objectives.
RoshanSpace's petition also sheds light on the allocation of advertising sites to competitors in ways that block premium hoardings, resulting in financial and operational losses for the company. Additionally, the lack of clear communication from railway authorities regarding these allocations raises broader concerns about the management, valuation, and transparent allocation of railway assets.
The company argues that certain advertising sites, which fall under NINFRIS, do not meet the criteria of being “new and innovative” and should therefore be subject to regular competitive bidding procedures. In its petition, RoshanSpace has called for a judicial review of NINFRIS to ensure that railway authorities adhere to the principles of transparency, fairness, and structured procurement in the allocation of public resources.
