Patna High Court
M/S Sati Sales Corporation vs The Union Of India on 21 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6903 of 2020
======================================================
M/s Sati Sales Corporation a proprietorship firm having its place of business
at 10 A, first floor, Narmada Apartment, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, Exhibition
Road, Patna through its proprietor namely Anand Vardhan male, aged about
50 years, son of Late Narayan Prasad Dalmia Resident of flat number 302,
Balajee Residency, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna- 800001.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Government
of India, New Delhi.
2. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.
3. The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Danapur, Patna.
4. The Chief Commercial Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.
5. The Divisional Railway Manager (Commercial) Danapur.
6. The Chief Goods Supervisor, East Central Railway, Danapur, Patna.
7. The Goods Superintendent, Danapur, East Central Railway, Danapur, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. D. Sanjay ( ADSG )
For the Railways : Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 21-01-2021
Heard Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, learned
Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar for
the Railways.
2. The petitioner has sought quashing of the
demurrage bill dated 20.03.2020 issued by the Chief
Goods Supervisor, Danapur, Patna as also the wharfage
bill of Rs. 1,73,250/-. The only reason for the petitioner to
Patna High Court CWJC No.6903 of 2020 dt.21-01-2021
challenge the aforesaid billing is that he was never noticed
about the aforesaid demand.
3. Initially, the assertion of the petitioner was
disputed by Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, learned Advocate for
the respondent/Railways but in the counter affidavit filed
on behalf of the Railways, the aforesaid contention of the
petitioner has not been disputed but the prayer is sought
to be challenged on the ground that the same is premature
as an alternative remedy of appeal is available to the
petitioner for him to ventilate his grievance.
4. However, along with the counter affidavit an
order passed by this Court on 10.07.2020 passed in CWJC
No. 7113 of 2020 has been annexed. In the aforesaid case
also there was a challenge to the demurrage penalty and
the same was challenged because of no notice having been
served to the petitioners therein. This Court had taken the
view that even though an alternative remedy is available to
a party for approaching the higher authorities for waiver of
penalty but referral to a higher authority would only be
Patna High Court CWJC No.6903 of 2020 dt.21-01-2021
time taking and unnecessarily result in matters remaining
pending for final decision.
5. In that instance, this Court had set aside such
billing and directed the matter to be placed before the
Chief Goods Supervisor, East Central Railway, Danapur,
Patna to first notice the petitioner therein and then pass
orders in accordance with law within a reasonable period of
time.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner shall stand satisfied if the same kind of order
is passed.
7. Considering the aforesaid submissions on
behalf of the parties, this Court is inclined to quash the
demurrage bill dated 20.03.2020 and the wharfage bill of
Rs. 1,73,250/-. This Court takes notice of the fact that
demurrage charges have already been recovered from the
petitioner.
8. In any view of the matter, the relevant records
are directed to be transmitted to the Chief Good
Patna High Court CWJC No.6903 of 2020 dt.21-01-2021
Supervisor, East Central Railway, Danapur, Patna who
shall notice the petitioner and after receiving his reply,
shall pass an order in accordance with law within a
reasonable period of time.
9. The petitioner would be entitled to challenge
the recovery of demurrage amount in reply to the show
cause notice. The concerned authority shall take a call on
the facts of the case and if any revision in such billing is
required, that shall be done without wastage of any time.
10. The writ petition stands disposed off with the
aforesaid direction/observation.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
krishna/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 23.01.2021
Transmission Date
