Back
High Court Of Calcutta
SUSANTA CHATTERJI
OTA FALLOONS FORWARDERS PVT.LTD - Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT THE PORT OF CALCUTTA - Respondent
C. R. 7562 (W) Of 1981
Decided On : 07/19/1988
MAJOR PORT TRUSTS ACT, 1963 - SCALE OF RATES (SCHEDULE OF CHARGES) - SECTION 6A (VI), SECTION 21, SECTION 52 - IMPOSITION OF PENAL RENT ON UNCLEARED CARGO AT HALDIA DOCK COMPLEX - VALIDITY CHALLENGED.
Fact of the Case:
The Calcutta Port Trust issued a circular imposing a penal rent of three times the ordinary rent on cargo not cleared within one month from the date of landing at Haldia General Cargo Berth. The petitioners, importers, challenged the imposition of the penal rent, arguing that it was illegal and without jurisdiction.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the imposition of the penal rent was valid and legal. It found that the Board of Trustees had the power to impose the triple rent as proposed in the instant case and no further approval of the Central Government was at all necessary. Once the Board has the power to impose the penalty the Board has the power to ratify the action of the Chairman in this case. The question of delegation does not arise in the strict sense of the term, as the Chairman being the delegated authority, has only imposed the rate of triple rent. On the other hand, the Chairman having the general authorisation to act for the Board has made the decision and the said decision being ratified by the Board, becomes a decision of the Board itself. Once a decision becomes the act of the Board, the question of further approval of the Central Government is not at all necessary.
Issues: 1. Whether the imposition of the penal rent was illegal and without jurisdiction? 2. Whether the Board of Trustees had the power to impose the triple rent without the approval of the Central Government?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the imposition of the penal rent was not illegal and without jurisdiction. It found that the Board of Trustees had the power to impose the triple rent as proposed in the instant case and no further approval of the Central Government was at all necessary. 2. The court held that the Board of Trustees had the power to impose the triple rent without the approval of the Central Government. It found that the Board had already reserved the right to impose the triple rent as proposed in the instant case and no further approval of the Central Government was at all necessary.
Final Decision: The writ petition was rejected without any order as to costs. All interim orders were vacated.
( 1 ) THE Rule was issued on 29-5-1981 at the instance of the writ petitioners who have prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw, cancel and/or rescind the circular dated 4-4-1981 issued by the Manager, Traffic Operation, Haldia Dock Complex as regards the imposition of penal rate at three times of the ordinary rate of rent on cargo not cleared within the month from the date of landing at Haldia General Cargo Berth. The copy of the said circular is annexed to the writ petition marked by letter 'b'. It appears from the said circular that the Chairman, Calcutta Port Trust has approved the recovery of triple rent on cargo at Haldia if not cleared within one month from the date of landing and the order will take effect on and from 1-4-1981. While issuing the rule an interim order of injunction was granted in terms of prayer (f) by restraining the respondents from giving any effect or further effect to the approval of the Chairman, Calcutta Port Trust as communicated under circular dated 4-4-1981 as aforesaid and further from taking any steps or further steps seeking to impose levy and/or collect penal rent at triple rate of the ordinary rate of rents and further directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to clear the goods on payment of usual rent and further restraining the respondents from giving any effect or further effect to and from taking any steps or further steps on the basis of the rent bills being annexure 'a' to the writ petition. The writ petition has been filed on the ground that the purported levy, imposition and/or collection of penal rent at triple rate of the ordinary rate of rent is wholly bad in law and without jurisdiction. Under the extant provisions of law and/or the rules framed under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 rates relating to Scale of Rates (Schedule of Charges) will govern the rates pertaining to rent and other charges in respect of Haldia Dock Complex. The rent bills issued in respect of consignment referred to are ex facie, illegal and without any authority of law inasmuch as there is no warrant and/or sanction of law to justify such imposition of rent. The circular dated 4-4-1981 is due to utter overzealousness to collect rental charges at three times of the original rate of rent is unwarranted and uncalled for. The Chairman, Calcutta Port Trust is not competent to decide imposition of penal rates and to recover the triple rate of rent under the provisions of Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 and under Section 6 of Scale of Rates (Schedule of Charges ). According to the petitioners the circular dated 4-4-1981 is de hors the provisions of Section 6 of the Scale of Rates (Schedule of Charges) and is as such wholly illegal, arbitrary and mala fide and consequently the same is invalid, inoperative and unenforceable. It is further alleged that the formation of opinion of the Trustees is conspicuously absent and the Chairman is swayed by some collateral considerations and there being no provision for such imposition of penal rent the approval of the Chairman vis-a-vis the circular dated 4-4-1981 is bad in law.
( 2 ) THE writ petition is very seriously contested by the respondents - Port Trust Authorities, Calcutta. It is contended that often consignments landed from ships remain uncleared in the port premises for a long time and affect operational efficiency. To counteract such delay in clearance of goods, there is provision in Section 6a (VI) of the Scale of Rates under which the Board is authorised to charge three times of scheduled rent on any grounds which in the Board's opinion could have been removed from the port premises before rent was incurred. To have a beneficial impact the imposition of such triple rent on any uncleared consignment should be done as soon as the situation begins to (affect) operational efficiency and to cause congestion in transit sheds. In order to obviate any delay in imposing triple rent in such a situati
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
