Judgment S.N.Pathak, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3rd April 1996 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal in Application No. Y3/18/2. 2. It was a case of booking of a consignment of maize and its short delivery. The respondent filed the aforesaid case and the Railway Claims Tribunal, on the oasis of certain admitted documents, granted an amount of Rs. 11,663.50 as compensation to the respondents. The appellant challenged the aforesaid order of the Railway Claims Tribunal on the ground that the consignment was loaded directly into the wagon and the senders weight given by the consignor was accepted as weight of consignment. The Railways did not weigh the consignment itself and the RR in its endorsement stated that the consignment was said to contain a particular weight. The loading was not supervised by the Railway authority. The Wagon had reached its destination with the seals intact. However, one of the seals was found to have cracked on verification. On the basis of the aforesaid admitted facts, the appellants lawyer submitted that the Railways was not liable to pay any compensation to the respondents; because neither the Railways had weighed the consignment nor the loading was supervised by the Railway authority. 3. However, the admitted fact was that the Railways granted short certificate to the respondents according to which there was shortage of 5554 kg. of maize. Moreover, the Railways had accepted the consignment and weight shown by the consignor was also accepted. In such a circumstance, the Railways had admittedly accepted the liability for safe and complete delivery of the consignment under booking. Moreover, one of the seals, on verification was found to have cracked. So this was also a circumstance indicating certain found play on the part of the carrier (Railway) in safe and complete (without any shortage) delivery of the consignment. At this stage, it was further submitted by the appellants lawyer that there was a scandal practised by the persons concerned in issuing short certificate in order to benefit all the concerned persons. So it appears that a kind of scandal practised by the concerned persons is a scandal to put the Railways to a loss. It is apparent that the Railways employees themselves, in collusion with the consignor or the consignee of commercial goods are involved in this racket. So it appears that a kind of scandal practised by the concerned persons is a scandal to put the Railways to a loss. It is apparent that the Railways employees themselves, in collusion with the consignor or the consignee of commercial goods are involved in this racket. So, I think some reform is needed in the Railways Rules to stop this racket, and to verify, supervise and accept the consignment for booking, after proper weighment and proper checking of the consignment. Without the aforesaid reforms, if at all there is any requirement in this behalf in the Rule, and without effective checking and control over the Railway employees, at the spot, there is on chance of the racket to be curbed. 4. In the result, this Miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Secretary of the Railway Department, Union of India for the needful.