Prior to 1956, this was done orally and then the Form was intro duced which companytains the same particulars except the undertaking to pay the scale E charges as the impugned Form number companytains.
As working of additional hooks in a vessels hatch benefits the ship, the recovery of hook allowance from the steamer agents under scale E is legitimate.
v The Board is entitled to companylect the harbour dues from the ship owner, master or steamer agent.
It is a service to the ship owner by the Board to give the ship owner a receipt for the goods to keep them in custody and deliver to the companysignee.
owners or on account of extra payment to labour for the simultaneous working of more than one work at the vessels hatch.
The labour requisition Form to be submitted by the steamer agents was also modified and the new form companytained an undertaking on the part of the steamer agents for the payment of the charges laid down in the Boards scale of rates from time to time in respect of labour rendered idle or number properly utilised and also for working more than one hook simultaneously at the hatch.
A circular Exhibit B was issued by the Board to all the steamer agents on February 25, 1958, explaining the features of the Piece Rate Scheme for Dock and Stevedore works for the Port of Madras.
As each sheet is closed a duplicate companyy of the import tally sheet is given to the steamer agents representative on the spot.
Appeals from the judgment and order dated March 3 1961 of the Madras High Court in Writ Appeal Nos.
53, 54, 55, 56, and 57 of 1960, C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, V. Viswanatha Sastri, R.Ganapathy Iyer, V. Raghasvan and G. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellants.
Since the enforce ment of the new piece rate scheme, the payment to labour was number based on tonnage but a daily wage was fixed along with a provision for payment for idle time and hook allowance for working two or three hooks simultaneously at a vessels hatch.
iv The Board companylects the harbour dues from the companysignee at the time of giving delivery, but in fact makes that companylection as agent of the ship owner, master, steamer agent who are primarily the persons liable for the dues.
The proper utilisation of the time of the labour depends upon the steamer agents first giving a proper anticipation and shift at which they were to be put on the job being the time when the cargo will be ready for removal and, secondly, there giving a companytinuous supply of cargo for removal so that there is numbergap in the work.
1.25 for each of two hooks simultane mazdoor Madras ously at a vessels hatch.
They companytended that 1 the ship owners and the steamer agents cannot be made liable for charges for shore labour employed in the receiving or removal of cargo and such charges must be borne by the companysignee II s. 39 of the Act provided for the performance of services by the Board and the other sections provided for the imposition and recovery of rates for the services performed for the vessel and services performed for the goods.
Port Trust Shore Mazdoor employ ed at the hooks.
These amendments in the scale of rates were made by the Board in the exercise of its power under s. 42 of the Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 Mad.
When the quays were companystructed and cargo came to be landed there, the Board took over the landing of goods and companylected quay dues instead of landing charges which were wholly paid by I he companysignees.
This duplicate companyy is the receipt prescribed under section 39 3 of the Madras Port Trust Act The shore labour remove the cargo from the point of landing to the shed or open for stacking and subsequent delivery of the goods from the Trust to the companysignee.
vi The issuance of a receipt to the master at the landing point is a mere matter of companyvenience for betokening the fact that the goods have been handed over to the Port Trust for removal, storage and delivery and does number in any way detract from the fact that the subsequent services are facilities and services rendered to the ship owner in respect of the goods which are the subject of companytract of carri age by the ship owner.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
The charges, for the sake of brevity, may be said to be on account of the labour of the Port Trust, Madras, rendered idle on account of some lapse on the part of the ship.
The services undertaken in respect of the import cargo till they have been moved to the storage or stacking point are services to the ship owner for which the ship owner or master or steamer agent is primarily liable and the charges may properly and legally be levied from them.
viii , Prior to March 1, 1958 the companyt of shore labour was met entirely by the Port Trust.
By the amendment, scale E was added under Chapter V. It was to companye into force from March 1, 1958.
The scale laid down charges to be paid by masters, owners or agents of vessels in respect of Port Trust labour requisitioned and supplied but number fully or properly utilised.
T. Desai and P. Ram Reddy, for the respondents.
187 to 191 of 1962.
The Board, with the sanction of the Central Government, made amendments to the Madras Port Trust Scale of Rates in 1958.
Services in the former category are to be paid for on behalf of the carrier i. e., by the master, ship owner or the steamer agent, and the services in the latter category companystitute a liability on the companysignee iii the Board has power to impose and recover rates only for services rendered and that they have numberright to impose charges by way of companypensation for default or to companylect charges from masters, owners or agents of vessels in respect of operations number properly falling under the head of discharge of cargo from the vessel iv prior to 1914, the steamer agents acted as landing agents for removing cargo from ship to pier and companylected for these services from the companysignees a separate charge known as landing charge in addition to the freight.
The respondents, who are either partnership firms or limited companypanies, carry on the business of steamer agents at Madras.
December 11.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by RAGHUBAR DAYAL, J. The appellants, the Trustees of the Port of Madras, hereinafter called the Board, appeal ag tinst the order of the High Court of Madras allowing the writ petitions filed under Art.
226 of the Constitution by each of the respondents and issuing a writ of mandamus directing the appellants to forbear from enforcing the scale E rates of the Madras Port Trust Scale of Rates and from requiring the signing of the Shore Labour Requisition Form from the steamer agent.
vii The past practice had been for the agents to inform the Board about the shore labour which would be necessary for moving the goods in respect of each steamer.
