SATGURU ENGINEERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Chetia for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Barkataki, the learned Standing Counsel, NF Railway appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

(2.) The case of the petitioner may be briefly narrated at the outset.

(3.) The petitioner, who is engaged in the business of undertaking transportation of materials, responded to the tender issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) for handling bitumen drums. The bitumen drums were to be unloaded from the railway wagons and thereafter, loaded in trucks for onward transportation to IOCL, Bitumen Yard, Noonmatim, Guwahati. The petitioner was selected and issued work order on 19.12.2013 (Annexure - 1) for handling the packed bitumen. On 23.12.2013 at around 6:00 AM, when the petitioner was unloading the bitumen drums of the IOCL from the railway wagons, there was a clash between the labourers and drivers in the Railway premises. As a result, all roads and passages were blocked by trucks within the railway yard and the movement of trucks came to a complete standstill. The petitioner was unable to unload the railway wagons carrying bitumen drums within the stipulated time that was allotted and it was only on 26.12.2013 that the petitioner was able to unload the wagons after the strike was called off by the labourers. Because of the delay in unloading the bitumen drums, the respondents Railway authorities imposed demurrage charge amounting to Rs. 6,27,300/- and waiting charge of Rs. 6,070/- upon the petitioner. The petitioner vide Communication dated 27.12.2013 (Annexure - 3) wrote to the Divisional Railway Manager, NF Railway, Lumding informing the said authorities that it was only due to the clashes between the labourers and the drivers in the Railway premises that the work of unloading and loading of bitumen drums could not be carried out within the time given. Because of the clashes, the roads and passages were blocked by the trucks and the movement in the railway yard came to a standstill. Therefore, the petitioner requested that the demurrage charge and the waiting charge be waived in full. However, vide Communication dated 19.02.2014 (Annexure - IV), the request for waiving demurrage charge and waiting charge was rejected. The petitioner thus being aggrieved has approached this Court through the present writ petition.