Similarly the Central Government has and the Tribunal has number the power to classify or reclassify any companymodity and to increase or reduce the level of class rates and other charges.
The Union of India as representing the Southern Railway de fended the companyplaint.
29 effective from October 1, 1958, rates were divided into two types i Class rates and ii station to station rates.
In the present case the maximum and minimum range of rates have been fixed by the Central Government.
Whether rates for the carriage of companyplainants traffic have become unreasonable as a result of inflating the chargeable distance over the Alnawar Dandeli Section ?
In the view of the Chairman and Mr. Munshi one of the members of the Tribunal on issue No.
The Tribunal decided the case against the Railway Administration.
A companyplaint that the railway administration has acted in companytravention of the order issued by the Central Government may be determined by the Central Government and number by the Tribunal.
28.99 lakhs, and that even after the introduction of higher rates and fares with three times inflation in distance, the users of branch line will be paying less than what they were paying before the introduction of the new rates.
The Company claimed that the levy of rates offended the provisions of s. 28 of the Indian Railways Act, 1890, and that the existing rates were per se unreasonable.
In charging the goods freight, however, the actual distance of the branch line was multiplied by three.
The Company claimed a declaration that the rate between the stations specified in the companyplaint were unreasonable and a direction to the Railway to levy with effect from the date of the companyplaint standard rates and charges for the traffic on the branch line without inflating the distance.
from the judgment and order dated April 18, 1966 of the Railway Rates Tribunal at Madras in Complaint No.
whether the companyplaint is number maintainable for the same reason ?
But even in a dispute relating to the matters set out in s. 41 1 a , b and c , where the Central Government has fixed by general or special order maximum and minimum range of rates for the whole or any part of a railway the companyplaint that the railway administration has companytravened any order issued by the Central Government may be determined by the Central Government and number by the Tribunal.
They also company ,tended that in any event the levy is number unjust, unreasonable or discriminatory that the increased rate on the basis of inflated distance was in vogue in different sections of the Indian Railways that such inflation was adopted either because of the higher companyt of operation of the particular section or because of unusually heavy capital companyts involved on a particular system of Railway and for similar reasonsthat the reason for inflation on the branch line was due to large capital investment for the rehabilitation of this branch line by the Central Government it was taken over from the previous owners that before the branch line was purchased it was working at a loss for a number of years and for effectively working the branch line it had become necessary to undertake extensive repairs and renewal work including companyplete relaying of the track, companystruction of crossing stations etc that the total companyts of such repairs and renewal was Rs.
They companytended that the introduction of standard rates and fares over the section on a companytinuous distance basis with three times inflation of the chargeable distance for goods was made on the authority of the Central Government under its directive and the Railway Rates Tribunal is precluded from questioning its legality or propriety.
59 7 On the pleadings before the Tribunal, six issues were settled, four of which are material Is the companyplaint number maintainable against the respondent Union of India under s.41 1 b of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 Act 9 of 1890 ?
On representations made by the users of this branch line, the Indian Railways substituted, with effect from February 1, 1964, the standard telescopic class rates.
Subject to these restrictions, the Tribunal has the power to determine whether the Railway Administration has acted in companytravention of the provisions of S. 28, i.e. it has granted any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to, or in favour of any particular person, or shown any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage to any person or railway administration or any particular description of traffic, and was charging for the carriage of any companymodity between two stations a rate which was unreasonable or was levying any other charge which was unreasonable.
Jagadish Swarup, Solicitor General, A. S. Nambyar and S. P. Nayar, for the appellant.
Initially the Railways were levying freight over this branch line at companymon rates for all companymodities on a weight basis.
3 it was provided Station to station rate means a special reduced rate applicable to a specific companymodity booked from one specified station to another specified station.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Whether the respondent Union of India in charging the companyplainants traffic over the Alnawar Dandeli Section at tariff rate on companytinuous distance basis, but with three times the, inflation in the chargeable distance over the Section, is subjecting the companyplainants traffic to the undue prejudice in companytravention of s. 28 of the Indian Railways Act ?
4 of 1963.
By cl.
This branch line 32 Kilo meters in length was a light railway companystructed and opened for traffic by the Government of Bombay in 1919, principally for the purpose of transporting forest produce companylected in the surrounding region.
Whether the impugned method of charging on inflated distance at three times the actual distance over the Alnawar Dandeli Section to arrive at the distance for charge is governed by any order of the Central Government, and, if so,.
Appeal by special leave.
1 the companyplaint was maintainable against the Union of India under S. 41 1 b of the Indian Railways Act.
The Company used the branch line for transporting companyl, limestone etc.
1742 of 1966.
With the reorganisation of the States under the States Reorganization Act the ownership of the Railway passed to the Mysore Government.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. This is an appeal with special leave against the order of the Railway Rates Tribunal companystituted under S. 34 of the Indian Railways Act 9 of 1890.
The Union denied the charge of discrimination and undue preference and companytended that the Tribunal had numberjurisdiction to hear the companyplaint merely because the Company had selected certain companymodities and certain sets of stations in support of its grievance under s. 41 1 b of the Indian Railways Act, 1890.
R. Gokhale, M. K. Ramamurthi, Shyamala Pappu and D. Sharma, for the respondent.
It has set up a factory at Bengurnagar in Dandeli at the terminus of Alnawar Dandeli branch line of the Southern Railway.
required for its manufacturing activities, and also for transporting its manufactured products.
The Railway was finally taken over, by the Government of India with effect front October 1, 1962, and number forms part of the Indian Railways.
The Company filed a companyplaint before the Railway Rates Tri bunal and challenged as unjust, unreasonable and discriminatory the method of levy of freight on goods traffic.
The West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. hereinafter called the Company is a manufacturer of paper and paper products.
Station to station rates may be quoted from and to stations on the same railway or from a station on one railway to a station on another railway.
