1992 Supreme(Raj) 841

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
G.S.Singhvi, J.
Mangalam Cement Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
The Goods Superviser, Western Railway, Kota and Others - Respondent
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 672 of 1992 (Against the order dated, 18.7.1992, passed by the Addl. District Judge No. 3, Kota, camp Ramganjmandi, in Civil Appeal No. 42 of 1992).
Decided On : 25-08-1992

The General Manager of a zonal railway is authorised to act on behalf of the railway administration.

Headnote:

RAILWAYS ACT - SECTION 3(6) - INDIAN RAILWAYS ACT, 1890 - GENERAL MANAGER OF A ZONAL RAILWAY IS AUTHORISED TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a public limited company, had a cement factory at Aditya Nagar, Morak, Tehsil Ramganj Mandi, district Kota, where cement was manufactured. The petitioner entered into an agreement with the Railway Administration on 2.3.81 regarding the terms and conditions of use and working of railway siding. The agreement provided for free time and demurrage charges. In 1982, the Railway Administration introduced the schema of loading full Jumbo rake which consisted of 100 wagons and a total loading capacity of 22 M.T. The petitioner found the system to be highly unworkable and arbitrary and made a representation to the Railway Administration. On the basis of the representation, the Railway Board directed the petitioner to approach the General Manager, Western Railway. It was thereafter agreed that joint trial be conducted to verify and determine the actual time required for loading the Jumbo Rake. The Joint Trial Team came to the conclusion that 411/2 hours was the minimum time required for loading Jumbo rake at the site. The General Manager accepted these recommendations and the authorities of the Western Railway acted upon those recommendations till 1986. In 1986, the Goods Supervisor, Western Railway, orally informed the petitioner that the existing facilities of providing 411 hours as free loading time stands withdrawn and henceforth the company will be liable to pay demurrage in case of its failure to load the Jumbo rake within 13 hours. The petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction against the non-petitioners in the court of Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ramganj Mandi and claimed that the action of the non-petitioners was highly arbitrary, unreasonable and discriminatory as also contrary to clause 17 (c) of the agreement. The trial court granted an ad interim injunction, which was confirmed by the trial court on 20.3.87 after hearing the parties. The non-petitioners filed appeal before the District Judge, Kota, who remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh decision after proper service on the Divisional Railway Manager. The trial court again heard the parties and passed the order of injunction dated, 25.9.90. The non-petitioners appealed before the Additional District Judge No.3 and the learned Additional District Judge has passed the order dated, 18.7.92. He has set aside the order of the trial court and dismissed the application of injunction filed by the petitioner.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the General Manager of a zonal railway is authorised to act on behalf of the railway administration. The court also held that the petitioner was not entitled to the facility of 411/2 hours free time as the Railway Board had not approved the recommendations of the Joint Trial Team and the General Manager, Western Railway. The court further held that the petitioner was not entitled to specific performance of the contract for 411/2 hours free time as there was no concluded contract between the parties.

Issues: 1. Whether the General Manager of a zonal railway is authorised to act on behalf of the railway administration? 2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the facility of 411/2 hours free time? 3. Whether the petitioner was entitled to specific performance of the contract for 411/2 hours free time?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the General Manager of a zonal railway is authorised to act on behalf of the railway administration, relying on the definition of Railway Administration used in Section-3 (6) of the Indian Railways Act, which states that the General Manager will be deemed to be the Railway Administration. 2. The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to the facility of 411/2 hours free time as the Railway Board had not approved the recommendations of the Joint Trial Team and the General Manager, Western Railway. The court noted that the General Manager had recorded a note on 20/30.3.83, in which he stated that the decision to allow 411/2 hours free time was subject to the approval of the Railway Board. The court also noted that the Railway Board had issued a letter dated 12-12-83, which contained a specific guideline regarding free time for loadings and un-loading of Jumbo Rakes. The decision of the Railway Board became effective from 1-1-84. Therefore, the General Manager, western Railway, Had no authority to allow free time facility of 411/2 hours to the petitioner after 1-1-84. 3. The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to specific performance of the contract for 411/2 hours free time as there was no concluded contract between the parties. The court noted that the petitioner had not produced any document before the Court showing that the Railway Board had approved the recommendations made by the Joint Trial Team and the General Manager, Western Railway.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner.