Dehri Rohtas Light Railway Co. Ltd. vs Central Godhar Colliery Co. And Anr. on 28 August, 1964
In other words, apart from the rules that could be made under Section 47 of the Act, a railway company can also make rules for general purposes of day to day administration
In support of this, reliance was placed on the case of Pallonji N. Metha v. State, AIR 1952 Bom 421. In that case, a passenger who held a season ticket was found to be subject to a penalty as the season ticket was not in proper form. Rule 39(1) was the basis of that. The question arose whether that rule had been made under Section 47 of the Railways Act. The learned Judge observed that a railway could frame a rule apart from rules under Section 47 if that is not in conflict with the Act, or the rules framed under Section 47 and the rule is reasonable. But such a rule cannot contain any provision in regard to any punishment or penalty. Section 113 of the Railways Act deals with travelling without pass or ticket or with insufficient pass or ticket or beyond authorised distance and penalties have been provided thereunder. I cannot see how that decision can be of any help to the plaintiff here.