The court ruled that stacking charges are valid under Railway guidelines, imposing fees for early cancellation of indents within prescribed periods.

ORDER :

These petitions are filed being aggrieved of the action of the Railway authorities in imposing stacking charges by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 upon the petitioners on the count of stocking of goods at platform/Railway siding.

2. Petitioners’ contention is that they are companies and are engaged in the business of transportation of goods and articles through Railway to various destinations. In the course of their business, petitioners are required to handle and transport goods and material and are regularly dealing with Railway authorities which is one of the major agencies involved in the movement of goods throughout the country.

3. It is submitted that for the aforesaid purposes, Railways have framed certain rules and issued circular from time to time. There are established trade practices. It is submitted that as per established practice, a party requesting the Railways submit indent to allot space along the railway siding/platform for stacking/stocking goods to be loaded in wagons. On such request, Railways provide space at the Railway siding/shed where on the stipulated days and time, stacking of goods takes place.

4. It is submitted that an option is always available to the party like the petitioners that if it is not possible for them to stock goods for transportation, then request for cancellation can be made and no charges are levied upon the party as the said space and period of time can be utilized and granted by Railway to any other party.

5. It is submitted that there is a business practice, interchangeability of stacking of goods and loading of wagons amongst similarly placed persons which is an established trade practice.

6. It is pointed out that vide Annexure P-1, stacking charges have been imposed by the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, South East Central Railway, Nagpur.

7. Reading from Annexure P-3 which is an invoice issued by the South East Central Railway, Garha Goods Shed (CGGS), it is pointed out that such practice is unknown to the petitioners, in as much as they are in regular business with the Railway authorities and are long time associates of the Indian Railways.

8. Reading from guidelines regarding Wharfage and Stacking contained in Annexure R-1, it is pointed out that charges could not have been levied against the petitioner.

9. Shri Manoj Sharma further referring to Chapter-III of the Master Circular dated 19-5-2016 submits that stacking charges or Wharfage charges are not statutory in nature, in as much as, there are guidelines regarding waiver and write off. The General Manager of the concerned Railway has full power to waive, Demurrage/Wharfage whereas CCM has power upto Rs. 1,00,000/-, DRM upto Rs. 25,000/- and so on upto the level of ACM/ATM/Area Officer in junior scale.

10. Shri Harshwardhan Singh Rajput, learned counsel for the Railways submits that there is no illegality in the impugned action. Clause 7.3 of the guidelines for advance stacking at Railway premises provides for “Permission for advance stacking can be granted to such rail users who have indented for wagons.”

11. It is submitted that there is a provision contained in Clause 7.8 that “Once advance stacking permission is granted, cancellation of indents will not be permissible upto fifteen days from the 1st day of advance stacking. In case Rail User cancels the indent within the aforesaid period Stacking Charge will be levied for the whole period of stacking.”

12. Thus, reading these clauses, it is submitted that petitioners have since cancelled the booking of wagon