The court emphasized the statutory provisions and the discretion of Railway officials in reweighment matters, and directed the immediate release of the Parcel Van due to the compelling urgency of releasing lifesaving drugs.

JUDGMENT :

1. Party/Parties is/are represented in the order of their name/names as printed above in the cause-title. The matter has been on the desk of this Court since the 29th of April, 2019. The circumstances under which the matter has been repeatedly brought to the notice of this Court for considering the petition on an urgent basis have been fully discussed by the order of this Court dated the 30th of April, 2019. Accordingly, the discussion requires not to be repeated.

2. Pursuant to the order dated 30th April, 2019, the petitioner appearing in person or, the Petitioner-in- Person, Mr. Jain, partner of the Petitioner No. 1/the Firm produces service of notice upon the Respondent/Railways of the order of 30th April, 2019 as received on the 1st of May, 2019. Inspite of service of notice and the clear directions in the order of 30th April, 2019 whereby the petitioners were entitled to put the Railways to notice of their liberty to pray for orders ex- parte in the event of non-appearance by the Respondents, none appears even today for the Respondents/Railways to oppose the petition. Considering the exigencies connected to Court proceedings as exist on date, no officer of the Respondents/North Eastern Railway (NER) is present with the records to assist this Court inspite of the notice dated 1st May, 2019 (supra).

3. The petitioners produce a No Objection from their learned Advocate dated 29th April, 2019 which, be taken on record and the Department is permitted to suitably number the No Objection Vakalatnama as filed today.

4. The Petitioner-in-Person submits that the Parcel Van in respect of which a contract has been entered between the Petitioner No. 1/the Firm and the Respondents/ NER containing lifesaving drugs has been detained from the 18th of April, 2019 at the Railway yard at Howrah terminus on the purported reason that the Parcel Van was found to be overweight during an in- motion weighment prior to the train in question being No. 15960/15959 Kamrup Express, entering the terminus.

5. The Petitioner-in-Person reiterates, as already recorded by the order dated 30th April, 2019, that the weighment in presence of the Railway/Respondents at the originating station, that is Dibrugarh, as reflected in the Manifest Register is inconsistent with the in-motion weighment which now purports to be claimed by the Railways.

6. The petitioner therefore prays for a similarity of directions as passed by this Court in W.P. 15460(W) of 2015 dated 9th July, 2015, which has been affirmed by this Court in a similar action brought against the Railways in W.P. 6753(W) of 2019 dated 27th March, 2019.

7. For the benefit of this discussion the final order dated 27th March, 2019 (supra) containing the directions dated 9th July, 2015 (supra) are completely extracted and read as follows:-

"27.03.19 Sws.M W.P. 6753(W) of 2019 [Harish Sharma vs. Union of India & Ors.] Mr. Debrup Bhattacharjee ...for the petitioner Mr. Mahendra Prasad Gupta Mr. M.K. Bandyopadhyay ....for the Union of India Party/Parties is/are represented in the order of their name/names as printed above in the cause-title.

8. he short grievance raised by the petitioner relates to a finding by the Respondents/Railways, more specifically the South Eastern Railway (SER), Khargapur Division, charging the petitioner, who is a parcel van operator under a contract with the SER, of excess loading of the parcel van to the extent of 3.20 tons.

9. The petitioner is aggrieved by the communication of the SER dated 17th March, 2019 from Shalimar Parcel Office demanding payment of punitive charges of Rs.1,50,942/- qua the alleged overloading.

10. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate for the petitioner, relies upon a Final Order of this Court dated the 9th of July, 2015 in W.P. 15460(W) of 2015. It is emphasised by learned Advocate for the petitioner that by the Order of 9th July, 2015 (supra) this Court applied its mind to the scope of the statutory provision contained in Section 79 of the Railways Act, 1989 (