PANKAJ SALT REFINERY Vs. GENERAL MANAGER AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226, 14 and 19(i)(g) of the Constitution of India on the grounds mentioned in the petition for the following prayers :

(2.) HEARD learned counsel, Shri Apurva Jani for learned counsel, Shri A.M. Dagli for the petitioner and learned counsel, Shri Sudhir Mehta for the respondent no.1.

(3.) LEARNED counsel, Shri Apurva Jani for the petitioner referred to the papers and submitted that the petitioner is engaged in the business of salt and had been exporting salt to various parts of the country. It is the case of the petitioner that the Railway is transporting such salt, which could be broadly categorized in two categories such as (1) Iodized Edible Salt Called as "B" priority; and (2) Refined Freeflow Iodized Edible Salt Called as "C" priority. Learned counsel, Shri Jani referred to the details as regards how the policy of the Railway works for the purpose of transportation of goods falling in different categories. However, he submitted that there have been shift in the policy or priority which has led to unnecessary payment by the petitioner and, therefore, the petition has been filed. Learned counsel, Shri Jani has referred to the details as regards how the priority has been denied to the petitioner, which has been stated in detail in the petition. He therefore submitted that the petitioner has right to carry on business of trade under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, which has been denied because of such arbitrary method of goods on priority. He further submitted that the rights have also been revised and the petitioner is required to pay at enhanced rate for every rack, which would cause a substantial difference in the amount to the tune of Rs.15.00 lacs approximately and, therefore, as there is no fault on the part of the petitioner, such action cannot be sustained. Learned counsel, Shri Jani has referred to and relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of ABL International Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. and Ors., 2004 3 SCC 553 in support of his submission about the maintainability of petition and even in contractual matter, the petition could be entertained and there is no bar even there is an alternative remedy provided in the statute.