JUDGEMENT

1. Since both the above cases involve more or less common facts and law, they have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgement.

2. In OAIII-176/2013 [OA(III)/GHY/2013/0221], the applicant’s claim is for refund of alleged overcharge of total Rs.1,75,008/- i.e., Rs.1,69,829/- as terminal charge/calculation mistake and Rs.5,179/- as punitive charge for alleged overloading with interest. In this case, a consignment of 2021 MT of Dry Fly Ash, packed in 58000 bags was booked in trainload under Invoice no.10/Railway Receipt no.212000194 dated

19.02.2013 ex. Kahalgaon/NTKS to Changsari.

While in OAIII-250/2013 [OA(III)/GHY/2013/0295], the applicant’s claim is for refund of alleged overcharge of total Rs.2,36,659/- i.e., Rs.2,29,074/- as terminal charge/calculation mistake and Rs.7,585/- as punitive charge for alleged overloading with interest. In this case, a consignment of 2661 MT of Dry Fly Ash, packed in 76000 bags was booked in trainload under Invoice no.07/Railway Receipt no.212000721 dated

19.04.2012 ex. Siuri to Digaru.

3. Applicants’ case: 3.1 Terminal Charge:

3.1.1 In both the cases, the applicants’ claim for refund of terminal charges is primarily based on