THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.A.NO.1555 OF 2008 JUDGMENT (PER THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) Heard both the sides. 2. This Writ Appeal is directed against a common order, dated 19.11.2008, passed a learned single Judge of this court, in W.P.M.P.Nos.32771 of 2008 and 32772 of 2008, in W.P.No.25108 of 2008, granting conditional interim directions. 3. Appellant is the petitioner and the respondents are the respondents in the writ petition. 4. Brief facts of the case, necessary for disposal of the present Writ Appeal, are that the appellant – M/s Shravan Shipping services Pvt. Ltd., is the company dealing with import and export of cargoes and is maintaining deposit account with Visakhapatnam Port Trust; that on the ground that the appellant has availed services of Visakhapatnam Port Trust and Committed default in payment, the Port Trust has raised a bill for Rs.34,06,800/- as penalty for evading payments and as there were insufficient funds in the account, by proceedings, dated 05.11.2008, directed the appellant to deposit sufficient funds. Challenging the same, the writ petition came to be filed and pending the writ petition, the writ petitioner/appellant sought for interim stay of the impugned proceedings, dated 05.11.2008. 5. The impugned common interim order, dated 19.11.2008, passed by the learned single Judge, in W.P.M.P.Nos.32771 of 2008 and 32771 of 2008, in W.P.No.25108 of 2008, is thus: “Interim directions as prayed for on condition of petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees seventeen lakhs only) towards penalty allegedly imposed earlier. This amount however, shall not be adjusted for shipping services provided by Visakhapatnam Port Trust and shall be kept on deposit. The amount shall be paid within a period of one week from today, in default, this order shall sand rescinded without further reference to the court”. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned common order cannot be sustained under law; that for evading payments, under Section 18 of Major Port Trust Act, only the Court, not inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate of First Class, can take cognizance and try the offence and not the respondent – Visakhapatnam Port Trust authorities and further under Section 115 of the Act, which deals with the penalty, if the offence is proved, the same shall be punishable with fine which may extend to ten times of the amount of rates so due, subject to a minimum of five hundred rupees. As the respondents have no jurisdiction, the impugned common order cannot be sustained. Furthermore, the direction to the appellant, in the impugned common order, to deposit an amount of Rs.17,00,000/- cannot also be sustained, inasmuch as, the same is in excess to the limit prescribed under Section 115 of the Act. 7. The question raised by the appellant cannot be decided at the interlocutory stage and the same has to be decided during the final hearing of the writ petition. 8. A perusal of the impugned common order would reveal that the appellant is due certain amount for availing the services of Visakhapatnam Port Trust. Further, as it is alleged that the writ petitioner has evaded payment, in the interest of justice and considering the balance of convenience, the learned single Judge has passed an equitable interim common order. Therefore, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned common order. 9. At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant may be permitted to provide bank security for the amount of Rs.17,00,000/-, which was directed to be deposited, as per the impugned common order, for which the learned counsel for the respondent did not object. 10. We are of the considered view that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the request of the appellant is acceded to, pending disposal of the main writ petition. Therefore, the appellant is permitted to provide bank security for the said sum of Rs.17,00,000/-, which was directed to be deposited, as per the impugned common order. 11. With the above modification, insofar as satisfying of the amount, which was directed to be deposited, as per the impugned common order, the Writ Appeal is disposed of, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------------- D.S.R.VARMA,J ------------------------------------ G.CHANDRAIAH,J DATE:27.11.2008 AVS