Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Nirma Limited & Anr vs The Union Of India & Ors on 23 February, 2017
1 February 23, 2017 R.C. W.P. 2917 (W) of 2017 Nirma Limited & Anr.
Vs. The Union of India & Ors.
-=-=-= Mr. Rajendra Kumar Mittal Mr. Kollol Basu Mr. Samik Sarkar ...for Petitioner Mr. Saptrshi Roy ...for U.O.I. The petitioner assails a demand made by the railway authorities.
The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the Railway authority have raised demands on the petitioner on the allegation of excess weight of the freight of the petitioner, without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to establish the correct weight of the consignment. The railway authorities did not consider the provisions of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. The freight booked and excisable goods. The petitioner has declared the weight of such goods to the Excise authorities and have paid duty thereon.
2The Excise authorities have accepted such weight. He submits that the petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity under section 79 of the Railways Act, 1989 for reweighment. He submits that the demand made by the railways authorities bad.
The railway authorities are represented.
The learned advocate for the railway authorities relies upon 2015 (2) Calcutta High Court Notes 156 (Union of India-Vs-Biswanath Agarwal) and submits that, in the instant case the railway receipt was prepared in absence of an officer of the railways so far as the weighment is concerned at the originating station. Under Section 79 of the Railways Act, 1989 the petitioner did not make any request for re- weighmentprior to the discharging of the goods. The railway authorities had discharged the cargo at the destination station. In view of Biswanath Agarwal (supra) the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.
The Full Bench in Biswanath Agarwal (supra) has noted various provisions on the Railways Act, 1989 including Sections 65 and 79 thereof. The Full Bench is of the view that the 3 onus of establishing the weight of the consignment is on the petitioner. He has to in a given situation where the railway receipt is prepared on the basis of weight as declared by the petitioner, and the weight of the cargo is not checked by any officer of the railways at the point of loading, then the onus is on the petitioner to establish such weight prior to the discharge of the cargo from the wagon.
In the instant case the railway receipt disclosed shows that the railways did not check goods by its officer at the point of origin. In transit the rake was weighed and it was found o that the cargo was over-weight. On the basis of such over-weight and other heads the railway authorities have made the demand impugned herein. The petitioner did not ask for weighment before discharge of the cargo from the rake. The cargo has not been taken delivery by the petitioner and is lying at the railway yard.
In view of Biswanath Agarwal (supra), the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. The demands raised by the railways are valid.
I find no merit in the present writ petition.
4W.P. 2917 (W) of 2017 is dismissed without any order as to costs.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.
(DEBANGSU BASAK-J)