•KSm^i&fM 1^'ISI^S KSiiiBts ^i^%:j|iy|;^$ .^-^ 'SSSiSSi^- i IBS^Sffiui^t-t^^ii m^SigSiK- :-%gsiiiasit OF JUD1CATURE CHHATTESGARH : BILASPUft _....-......-...-....-.-.-.-® '^^ : HON'BLE SHRI S.R. NAYAK,C,|g|gg... ffEtlTIONER SB K'' VSiStiSSKSSi'SSS^ ••B8KSfitSBIsl':''i%%IS^%i: 1.1I8SliiSSIIB£IIS?8II11 ::.^^^^lf^Nijife^^^'f^^::^::;^^^^ B3SSS PETITIONER ;i!BS^IIgli8SSSl%SSS18iJ^ :^K^iSiSSS9^SSSi'yiSi€SS BSB18iSii8llS?®I181il%^''::.'^^^^^^ 1:1 Writ Petition No.295 OF 1997 Vs. The Associated Cement CompanYUd., Jamul Cement Works through Senioi|,j Vice-President, Jamul CementWorte, Dist. Durg (MP) ~^^^^ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Union of India • ••.g^i^|§ti|||||SN^^ Through General Manager.i^^|ili|;t -^ South Eastern Rai!ways^a;'.%%il:31W&^fri....'<;:^ Garden Reach, Caicutta-700043.S;^,;:^ % The Chief Operating Managet.-lllig^v&'' South Eastern Ra itways, •• : •:'';:4l^f<i;''|®^'-^ •':;;: Garden Reach, Catcutta.:700043:ia%S%-.1':^ The Chief Freight Transportation t^€.^ y M^nager (I&S), South EasterniRailyiffiiys,^ -^ G^rden Reach, Calcutta - 70Q04a®i ,\Kx Divisional Raiiv^y Managery.j-^Kgg|P^^:;f^ South Eastern Railways,.:-;r^^y@^::^';,;-' Bilaspur Division, Bitaspu^^W^N1^^^^^^^ Senior DivisionaS Operating Manager, ^ v; So^th Eastern Railways,:^'®|jj-fji||^-,^^W. Bilaspur. . ''-'/';':^ V\/rit Petition No.1®8QF_i998 ^^.». Vs, The Associated Cement CompanyLtd., Jamui Cement Works through-Senior ' Vice-President,JamufCeme^tWor)(s,; Dist. Durg (MP) l.^:iq®:l';ll-fcll!SIC%s 1. Union of India ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ Through General Manager. South Eastern Railways, %i f ^ Garden Reach, Caicutta- 7QQ043;, ,^, .^ 2. The Chief Operating Manager,i?i South Eastern Railways,::,'-::'j"% ^%^,,i, ^s Garden Reach, Calcutta 700043 ;MI 3. The Chief Freight Transportation^.i,.^ Manager (I&S), South Eastern Railways,^ Garden Reach, Calcutta-<.7Qg(^s:||^| 4. Divisional Railway Manage^^sgig^-p|i|fe South Eastern Rajiways.,®|^g|1gg^^^&::;1:^ Biiaspur Division, Bilaspur (M.P.) % % 5. Senior Divisiona! OperatingManager, South Eastern Raiiways,:^||it|^'t'.;,^.;",.:y: Biiaspur(M.P.) ' C' i;'"i'^:i' . : ^ -^. Present: Shri Manindra Shrivastava, Se'aned Sr. Advocate with Shri Ashish Shrivastava, ie^rned counsel ror the petitioner. Shri Amit Chaudhari, learned counsel for the respondents/ Raiiways. ORAL_ORDER (Passed on 22nd June 2006) In these writ petitions, the actioni of the respondents-Railways in recovering certain sums of money as demurrage charges in terms of the Railways Act 1989 has been assailed. According to the petitioners, the demands so made are untenabte, highly excessivei and contrary to circulars (Annexure P/1 and P/2) issued by the Railways themselves. The Railways have filed return. The petitioners hj^ve filed rejoinder to the 1 return. The pteadings placed before the Court would show that in 1 pursuance of the representations made by the petitioners, waiver to an extent of 5% in demurrage charges has been aeceded to by the department itself. !t is the contention of the petitioners that what has been waived is totat!y inadequate and contrary to tihe above circulars issued by the department itself. The ciaim made byjthe petitioners has been seriousty disputed by the Rai'ways in their r^turn. The factual cor^roversy brought before the Court cannot be resol^ed satisfactority on the basis of affidavits and counter affidavits. Perhaps, realizing this position. a request was made by the tearned Senioif Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the petitioners be permitted to make a comprehensive reprosentation under the Tirne Motion Study' to the Divisional Railway K4anager, Bilaspur, because, he is empowered to grant waiverto an extent of more than 5% ofthe demurrage charges. (2) In that view of the matter, ieaving open ail contentions raised by the parties in their respective pieadings before thijs Court in these writ - 3 - ^ petitions to be agitated before the Divisional Railway Manager, 1 dispose of these writ petitions permitting the petitioners to make a comprehensive representation/applicaticn under the Time Motion Study* to the Divisiona! Railway Manager. If such represontation/application is made by the petitioners within a period of one month from today, the Divisional Railway Manager shal! consider the same under the Time Motion Study' and in terms of the relevant circular sssued by the Railways fromtime to time and after providing hearing to the authorized representatives of the petitioners. The dispute between the parties is pending forquite long time. It is trusted that the Divisional Raitway Manager would consider and dispose of the appSication of the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at ahy rate, within a period of six months from the date of submission of the app!ication''representation. The parties shail bear their respective costs in these \vrit petitions. - Sd/- Chief Justicc