SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(MP) 655

Madhya Pradesh High Court
G. P. SINGH,K. K. DUBE
K. P. Sons - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
Decided On : 11/30/1981

Advocates:
S. Awashthy, for Petitioner:S. P. Sinha, for Respondents.

The release of wagons to the petitioner for lime loading out of turn, without prior notice and proper justification, violated Rule 201(10) of the Goods Tariff No.36 and subjected the petitioner to unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage, contravening Section 28 of the Railways Act.

Headnote:

RAILWAYS ACT - SECTION 28 - SECTION 27-A - RULE 201 - PREFERENCE TO LIME TRANSPORTATION - OUT OF TURN WAGONS RELEASE - UNREASONABLE PREJUDICE OR DISADVANTAGE - VALIDITY OF WAGONS RELEASE AND CANCELLATION OF INDENTS.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in lime manufacturing and transportation, alleged that the railway authorities showed preference to them by allotting wagons for lime transportation out of turn, causing disadvantage and harm to the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the allotment order and sought to keep their indent alive, restraining the respondents from indulging in such malpractices.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the release of wagons to the petitioner for lime loading out of turn was in contravention of Rule 201(10) of the Goods Tariff No.36, which mandates allotment orders to be issued based on registration priority, preferential schedules, quotas, and operating considerations. The court held that the policy decision to clear off lime indents before the monsoon, cited as an operating consideration, was not communicated to the petitioner in advance and lacked proper justification.

Issues: 1. Whether the release of wagons to the petitioner for lime loading out of turn violated Rule 201(10) of the Goods Tariff No.36? 2. Whether the policy decision to prioritize lime transportation before the monsoon constituted a valid operating consideration under Rule 201(10)? 3. Whether the petitioner suffered unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage due to the out-of-turn wagon release?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Rule 201(10) to require the railway authorities to issue allotment orders based on registration priority, preferential schedules, quotas, and operating considerations. It emphasized the importance of adhering to these rules to prevent illegal practices and harassment of traders. 2. The court held that the policy decision to prioritize lime transportation before the monsoon did not constitute a valid operating consideration under Rule 201(10) because it was not communicated to the petitioner in advance and lacked proper justification. 3. The court concluded that the petitioner suffered unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage due to the out-of-turn wagon release, which violated the prohibition against undue or unreasonable preference or advantage under Section 28 of the Railways Act.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order of wagon release, and directed the respondents to release the ten wagons within two months with prior notice to the petitioner. The petitioner was also awarded costs of the petition.

Judgement

G. P. SINGH, C.J. :- The grievance in this petition under Art.226 of the Constitution is that a show of preference was made in favour of the petitioner by the Railway authorities in allotment of wagons for transporting lime from Jabalpur railway station but in truth the petitioner was subjected to a great disadvantage with a view to harm him.

2. The petitioner is a partnership firm and carries on business of manufacture of lime at Katni. The petitioner also indents wagons for transportation of lime from Jabalpur. The petitioner transports lime from Katni to Jabalpur by trucks and then loads it in the wagons allotted by the railway for transportation to different places in India. Between 7th Apr. 1981 to 28th Apr. 1981 on various dates the petitioner indented for thirteen wagons as mentioned in Annexure-A. On 7th May 1981 the petitioner received information of release of ten covered wagons for loading lime. This order (Annexure-B) was issued on 6th May 1981 at 5-50 P.M. The petitioner could not load the wagons, for, according to him, the wagons were supplied much out of turn and the petitioner could not be ready with goods for loading in the wagons. The petitioner complained on 7th May 1981 itself that the out of turn supply of wagons was with a view to harm the petitioner and such an action would encourage bribery and other illegal practices in the matter of supply of wagons. The complaint made by the petitioner had no effect. The petitioner then filed the present petition for quashing the order allotting the wagons and for directing the respondents to keep the petitioner's indent alive and for restraining the respondents from indulging in the malpractice of giving mala fide priority out of turn in violation of the rules.

3. Notice for admission of this petition was issued to the respondents. In answer to the notice, return has been filed and the petition has been heard on merits.

4. The return justifies allotment of wagons under R. 201 of Goods Tariff No.36 on operational considerations. It is stated that a policy decision was taken to clear off lime indents before the outbreak of Monsoon for the reason that transportation of lime during rains gives rise to number of claims entailing heavy cost in litigation. It is submitted that it was for this reason that wagons for lime loading were released in preference to timber merchants.

5. Section 28 of the Railways Act prohibit;, a railway administration from making or giving any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to, or in favour of, any person or any particular description of traffic in any respect whatsoever. The section further prohibits the railway administration to subject any particular person or any particular description of traffic to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever. S.27-A empowers the Central Government, in case it is of opinion that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, to direct any railway administration, by general or special order, to give special facilities for, or preference to, the transport of any such goods or class of goods consigned to the Central Government or to the Government of any State or of such other goods or class of goods as may be specified in the order. A direction under S.27-A by the Central Government is not deemed to be a contravention of S.28. The relevant provisions dealing with the registration of indents, allotment and supply of wagons are contained in sub-rules (l) to (20) of Rule 201. The procedure laid down in these sub-rules is to be followed subject to this that the Railway Administration, after due notice, can make temporary local variations in any of the sub-rules as they think fit to meet any exceptional circumstances or to prevent misuse. All demands for despatch of goods in wagon loads are entered in the wagon Demands/Priority Register maintained in the stations of goods sheds open for booking of goods in wagon loads. The prescribed registration fee is paid by












































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top