Judgment · High Court

Heard Ms. B. Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as wel l as Mr. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, NF Railway who has entered appearan ce on behalf of all the respondents and accepts notice on their behalf. Impugning the order-dated 16.5.2008, 15.5.2008,15.5.2008, 20.5.2008, 10. 5.2008 and 23.7.2008 (Annexure-2 series to the writ petition) by which punitive charges for coal rake (BCN) has been demanded from the petitioners, this writ pe tition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Ms. B. Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view o f the Section 73 of the Railway Act, 1989, the impugned demand can be made only before the delivery of the goods but in the instant case, demand has been made a fter the delivery of the goods and as such the petitioners are not liable to pay penalty charges so imposed upon them. Pr contra, Mr. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Railway has argue d that the petitioners’ remedy so sought herein lies before the Railway Claims T ribunal. Hence, the petitioners may be directed to seek relief before the Tribun al. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the par ties and also having regard to the decision of the Apex Court as reported in 199 8 (5) SCC 126 (Jagjit Cotton Textile Mills Vs. Chief Commercial Supdt. N.R. and Others) as well as the provision of Section 73 of the Railway Act, 1989, this Co urt is of the view that it would in the interest of justice to direct the petiti oners to approach the Tribunal above mentioned seeking relief so sought in this writ petition. It is ordered accordingly. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of.