Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 292 (ORI)

OLYMPIC OIL INDU. v. PARADEEP PORT TRUST

2013-08-12

C.NAGAPPAN, I.MAHANTY

body2013
JUDGMENT : 1. This writ application has come to be filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the opp. party-Paradeep Port Trust (for short, 'PPT') to permit the petitioner to lift the imported coal either by rake and/or by road from plot near Gate No. 3 ensuring smooth execution of transportation of 49,500 M.Ts. by allowing the importer/purchaser to perform its contractual obligations. Pursuant to the writ application, counter affidavit and additional affidavits have been filed. We have perused the affidavit and additional affidavit and its annexures. Page 7 of Annexure-D/1 to the Additional Affidavit filed on behalf of opp. parties nos. 1 and 2 contains the abstract dues raised against the petitioner, which are as follows: ABSTRACT 2. Mr. Rath, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that for various reasons the petitioner has been prevented to lift its cargo and many of such reasons are ascribable to the PPT for whose own action and inaction the licensee ought not to have been charged with the penal rate. He further contends that the penal licence fee even in accordance with the Scale of Rates fixed by the PPT permits a maximum of double the original licence fee, and violating the same quantification has made by the PPT. Apart from the same, he also challenges the applicability of MGT charges on the petitioner and demand raised thereof. 4. Shri Mishra learned counsel for the PPT, on the other hand, submits that the actual dues of the petitioner and the demands as raised are strictly in accordance with tariff fixed by the appropriate authority and there can be no question and, as per the agreement entered into by the petitioner with the PPT, the petitioner is bound by the changes made to the tariff rate. 5. The attention of the learned counsel for both the sides was drawn to the provisions contained in Section 53 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, which reads as hereunder. 5. The attention of the learned counsel for both the sides was drawn to the provisions contained in Section 53 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, which reads as hereunder. Sec. 53: "Exemption from, and remission of rates or charges-A Board may, in special cases and for reasons to be recorded in writing, exempt either wholly or partially any goods or vessels or class of goods or vessels from the payment of any rate or of any charge leviable in respect thereof according to any scale in force under this Act or remit the whole or any portion of such rate or charge so levied. 6. In view of the above, the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy to raise its claim before the Board for waiver and/or exemption of the levy claimed from them. We are of the considered view that the petitioner may approach the Board by filing a detailed representation within one week from today. In such event, the Board shall do well to consider and take a decision on the same after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and/or its representative keeping in view the nature of the cargo i.e. coal and the claim of the petitioner that it had purchased/imported the coal and presently has obtained necessary buyer for their cargo. As an interim measure, we direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 60,00,000/- (rupees sixty lakh) with the PPT and furnish an irrecoverable bank guarantee for Rs. 75,00,000/- (rupees seventy-five lakh) at the earliest. Upon such deposit as directed and bank guarantee being furnished, the PPT shall permit the petitioner to lift the cargo either by rail or by road and there shall be no impediment caused to the petitioner in this regard. 7. The aforesaid deposit as well as the bank guarantee furnished shall be subject to the decision that may be taken by the Board on the representation of the petitioner. It is made clear that we have expressed no opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and/or contentions raised on behalf of the PPT. The Board is at liberty to come to its own conclusion strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of such representation. 8. The Deputy Director of Mines-opp. party no. The Board is at liberty to come to its own conclusion strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of such representation. 8. The Deputy Director of Mines-opp. party no. 3 is directed to accord necessary permission to the petitioner and/or extend the period for transportation suitably as may be necessary. 9. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. Consequently, the Misc. Case(s) also stands disposed of. Free copy of this order may be handed to the learned counsel for the State. Urgent certified copy of this order be supplied to the petitioner and the learned counsel for the PPT on proper application. Final Result : Disposed Off