BHAGABEN DEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, carrying on the activity of supplying building materials under the name Dey Clearing Agency, booked 21 wagons with the Eastern Railway for carriage of stones from Pakur station to Dankuni Jn. station. The goods were loaded on October 29, 2008. Freight amounting to Rs. 4,27,222 was calculated, as will appear from the railway receipt, Annexure P2 at p. 18, on October 30, 2008 scribbling something that even Counsel for the parties are unable to decipher. At the destination station the goods were weighed by the railway administration on November 1, 2008 at 1.39 a.m. behind the petitioner's back. At 8 p.m. on November 1, 2008 the petitioner received a demand notice dated November 1, 2008, Annexure P3 at p. 19. He was asked to pay Rs. 5,57,758 punitive charges for overloading goods in the wagons. By the time the demand notice was received by him, he transported a substantial part of the goods from the place where they were unloaded from the wagons. Transportation of the remaining part was not allowed by the railway administration, since the demanded punitive charges were not paid by him. Feeling aggrieved, he took out the writ petition dated November 18,2008.

(2.) By an order dated December 23, 2008 the writ petition was admitted and the following interim relief was granted:

(3.) During pendency of the writ petition the railway administration issued a notice dated January 6, 2009 asking the petitioner to pay, in addition to the punitive charges, Rs. 9,21,600 wharfage charges. Seeking stay of operation of the notice the petitioner filed CAN No. 451 of 2009 dated January 19, 2009. Then the railway administration issued another notice dated February 7, 2009 asking the petitioner to pay, in addition to the punitive charges, Rs. 14,96,800 wharfage charges upto February 7, 2009. Seeking stay of operation of this notice the petitioner filed CAN No. 1725 of 2009 dated February 24, 2009. Then the respondents took out CAN No. 2692 of 2009 dated March 24, 2009 for an order dismissing the writ petition for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that over the subject-matter only the Tribunal has jurisdiction.