KALPATARU AGRO FOREST ENTERPRISE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. D. Mazumder, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, NF Railway appearing for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3.

(2.) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the impugned communication dtd. 26/4/2016 issued by the Chief Commercial Manager/FM (Court), Maligaon, Guwahati-11, whereby, the claim for calculation of the excess freight taken from the petitioner taking into consideration the distance factor and to release the excess freight to the petitioner after calculating the same has been rejected and the order dtd. 16/9/2016 passed by the Member (Judicial), Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati in Execution Nos. A-22/2015 (----.No. 787/1994), A-23/2015 (---.No. 788/1994), A-24/2015 (---.No. 789/1994), A-25/2015 (---.No. 792/1994), A-26/2015 (---.No. 793/1994), A-27/2015 (---.No. 794/1994), A-28/2015 (---.No.795/1994), whereby, the execution petitions are disposed of as no order is required to be passed in view of the order dtd. 26/4/2016 issued by the Chief Commercial Manager/FM (Court), Maligaon.

(3.) The briefly put, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a registered firm dealing with Bamboo Cuts which are supplied to different factories all over India. In the year 1993-1994, the petitioner supplied bamboo cuts from New-Bongaigaon to Amlai and the said consignments were sent through Railway carriage. But after delivery of the products, the petitioner firm came to know that the Railway authority has charged more freight from the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner firm instituted 8 (eight) claim applications before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati, claiming refund of the excess freight charged from the petitioner before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati claiming refund of the excess freight charged from the petitioner. The said Claim Applications were registered and numbered as C.A. Nos.787/1994, 788/1994, 789/1994, 791/1994, 792/1994, 793/1994, 794/1994 and 795/1994. The Railway authority contested the aforesaid Claim Applications and took a stand that station to station rate has been charged upon the petitioner and therefore, they are not entitled for any refund.