AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present writ petition has been preferred primarily praying for the following relief :
"a) A writ of or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding and directing the respondent nos.1, 2 and 4 and their subordinates officers, servants and agents to strictly act in terms of the instruction/direction dated 18 August 2011 issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs contained in Annexure "P-1" hereto and the Public Notice no.52/2011 issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Port) Kolkata contained in Annexure "P-2" hereto and ensure that all Direct Port Delivery and Direct Port Entry containers and passing through the Kolkata Dock of the Kolkata Port are weighed at the weighbridges set up by the petitioner and act according to law;"
Mr. Mitra, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that Direct Port Delivery and Direct Port Entry containers passing through the Kolkata Dock and Kolkata Port are mandatorily required to be weighed at the weighbridges installed by the petitioner, as a contractor of Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited. In spite of directions to that effect issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide memo dated 18th August, 2011 and Public notice nos. 52/2011 and 86/2011, the respondent no.4 has not complied with the same. Repeated representations submitted to the said respondent no.4 have also not been attended to. In support of such contention, reliance has been placed upon the documents annexed at pages 25, 26, 54, 56 and 59 of the writ petition. In the said conspectus, Mr. Mitra has prayed for an interim order to restrain the respondent no.4 from accepting the Direct Port Delivery and Direct Port Entry containers to pass through the Kolkata Dock and Kolkata Port without being weighed at the weighbridges installed by the petitioner.
Mr. Jena, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.4 disputes the contention of the petitioner and submits that the said respondent has acted in strict consonance with the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Shipping.
Upon hearing the learned advocates for the respective parties and upon considering the materials on record, I am of the opinion that the matter needs to be decided upon exchange of affidavits.
Accordingly, the respondents are directed to file their affidavits in opposition within three weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, be filed by within two weeks thereafter.
The maintainability point urged by Mr. Jena is kept open to be decided at the time of final hearing.
The petitioner is directed to intimate this order immediately to the non-appearing respondents.
The parties would be at liberty to mention the matter for final hearing after expiry of the period as fixed above towards exchange of affidavits.