PRAKASH ROAD LINES GORAKHPUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of quashing the demand notice dated 20.1.2010 issued by respondent No. 3, the Commercial Superintendent, Nakaha Jungle, North Eastern Railway, whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs. 13,79,407/- as punitive charges for the overload alleged to have been loaded on the goods train. We have heard learned Counsel Sri M.K. Tiwari on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Govind Saran learned Counsel for the respondent.

(2.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is enrolled consignee of M/s. Bridge Cement Industries and M/s. Jagdamba Cement Industries, Nepal and is regular user of the Indian Railway for proper and smooth transportation of the cement clinker and other materials associated to it. A rake consisting of 58 Box-N Wagon loaded with Cement Clinker was booked Ex-LCTS Nakaha Jungle Goods Shed on Railway Risk Rate which was delivered to the petitioner on 20.01.2010. It was properly weighed at several points under the strict control and supervision of the Excise and Custom Authorities being the duties leviable on the consignment. It was also duly weighed at the originating/first weigh bridge on the orders of the CFTM, North Western Railway, at Railway Bridge, LCTS/BANAS under the supervision of railway staff where the punitive charges detected on the wagon were duly deposited. The re-weighment of the goods loaded on the wagon was illegally and arbitrarily done by the railway authorities against the provisions of the relevant rules thereby demanding a sum of Rs. 13,79,407/- as punitive charges. Section 78 of the Indian Railways Act permits Railways to re-weigh any consignment before its delivery, but the Railway Board by way of Circular permitted re-weighment only in exceptional and peculiar circumstances and merely on the instructions of the Divisional Railway Manager which should be done thereby giving an opportunity to witness the re-weighment by the consignee and only if the wagon has not been weighed at the originating station due to non availability of the weigh bridge. In such circumstances, the Commercial Control of the originating station should send a message for the weighment of such rake to the Commercial Control of the Division where the first available en-route weigh bridge is located. Since the Railway Board has itself decided that once the weighment has been done at the originating station, it cannot be done at en-route or destination station in normal circumstances, therefore, the railway authority has reweighed the consignment ignoring the circulars in this regard. The petitioner had also moved a representation/appeal on 26.1.2010 against the notice dated 20.1.2010 ventilating all the grievances, but nothing has been done in this matter. On 8.2.2010 again, a representation was sent by the petitioner. There was no justification with the Railways for the second weighment at Sawai Madhopur Weigh Bridge as it was already done at the weigh bridge situated at LCTS/BANAS.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was found overloading of the goods train and for this reason, he is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 13,79,407/- as punitive charges imposed as per rules and regulations prescribed in section 73 of the Indian Railways Act. The Railway Administration has not established railway weigh bridge at LCTS/BANAS, the loading in this case on the rolling stock was not supervised by the railway authorities. The petitioner has himself accepted overloading of the rake at the time of the delivery of the consignment. Since no weigh bridge has been established at the originating station by the Railway Administration, hence, the weighment of the consignment in question at Sawai Madhopur cannot be challenged saying it unreasonable and against the Rules.