Coal merchants challenged railway restrictions on wagon-load coal booking and the Preferential Traffic Schedule as violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). The Supreme Court held the classification under section 27A valid, the restrictions reasonable in public interest, and dismissed the writ petitions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
657
VIKLAI) COAL MERCHANT, PATIALA, ETC. ETC.
A
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
October 28, 1983.
B
[D.A. DesA1 ANDO. CmNNAPPA REDDY, JJ.]
•.
Conslit1ltion of India Art. 19(1) (g)-Freedom to carry on trade or busines!-To exanzine whether restriction imposed 1easonable-:-Court to find out trade affected and keep in· view direct impact of r'estriction on trade and not ancilfary or indirect "e.ffec't.
Indian Railways Act, 1890-Sec. 27A-Interpretation of-rVhether v;W/ativc of Art. 19(/)(g) of Contiturion. ·preferential Traffic Schedule laying dolt'n priorities for movement of drfferent J:Oods issued by the Ministry OJ Railways under sec. 27A-Validi/y of-Whethr ultra Vire~ sec. 27A-Whether ultra Vires Arts. 14 and 19(1) (g) of tire Conslitulion. · ·
c
D
• _Indian Railways Act, 1890, section 28-lnterpretation of-Ministry of Railwa)'S order dated April I, 1972-U?/iether violative of sec. 28 and A1 t. 19( I) (g) of th~ .Constitution.
Section 27 of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 cast a duty on the railway administration to arrange for -receiving and forwarding traffic without 1:1nreason· able delay and without partiality; Sectiqn 28 prohibited the railway administration from giving undue or u.nreasonable preference or advantage to ally particular person or railw~·adrninistration or any particular description of traffic. Section 27A was inserted in the Act after 1950 to give power to the_ Central Governrr.ent to issue directions for giving speci3.1 facilities or preferenti3.1 treatment in transport of goods or class of goods consigned to the Central Government or the Government of any State-or of such other goods or clasS of goods as may b~ specified in the order.
The GovCtnment of India, Ministry of Railways issued aa order dated April 1, 1972 containing its decision to add an abbreviation 'GX' below the abbreviation 'G' in the list of abbreviations at page 14, Chapter VI of the IRCA Alphabetical list of Railway·Stations in India and asking the railway administration to decide and notify the-names of stations to which this new provisions would apply. Putting abbreviation 'GX' against a station meant that the station was not open for outward booking of coa1, coal shale etc. in wagon loads. Pursuant to this order; the abbreviation •a·X• was appended to all· way-side stations in the coat.belt. Thereafter- Qovernment of India, ·Ministry of Railways . by its order dB.ted April 27, 1972 revised ru.les J and 2 of the Eastern Railway Coal Traffic Part L T\1.,;; r~Yi$d rules provided inter a!ia that all ttatfi i9 coal ' ' '
E
F
G
H
658
•
[1984) 1 s.c.R.
SUPREME COURT R.EPORTS
etc. in. wagon loads will. be loaded only fr;~ colliery sidings, coke oven . plant8 A _and washeries on the Eastern Railway, ·bui coal in wagons will not be permitted· 'at the stations serving these colliery washeries. A further restdctiOn followed with effect from December 4, t979 when the .Divisional Operating Superintendent, Bilaspur for apparent reasQnS stopped booking of coal in smalls includina clubbing at all stations of North Eastern Railway. On February 11, . J980, a telegraphtc commup.ication was issued explaining that coal in wagon-loads can B be booked from colliery sidings by the collierJcS concern_ed. ~coking of slack · coal was wholly stopped as per a phone <all dated April 9, 1981. In exercise of the power conferred by sec. 27A ofthe Act, Union of India, the Ministry of Railways·issued Preferential Traffic Schedule. The schedufe pre~cribed five priorities 'A' to 'E' With inter se priorities amongst• A' to 'E' to .be accorded by the railways fo transport of certain· .goods or class. of g<?ods specified under each category. Different kinds of coal falls- under priority •C' (iii) which pro· c vides for movement of coal 'froin cOIJieries -in accrdance with programmes and _movements -sponsored .or recommended by the Coal Controller and/or any Cot11i1ittee appointed by him and/or the State Government• and/or other recommending authorities and accepted by the Railway AdministratiOn·s -and/or Director, Movement (Railways),. Calcutta, and in·acccirdance with the Zon_al Scheme applicable to each field and the principles of transport rationalisation in f0rce fr0m tin1e to time. Priority 'E', a residuy clause again involves coal D fron1 collieries.
• . .l
The petitione~ who· were coal merhants: alleged that. sum. total of various rd'strictions including one dated Aprll 1, 1972 introducing "abbreviation 'GX' and the PrefeMntial.Traffi.c Schedulc•specifying priorities under sec. 27A . (1) o'f the Act in their cumulative effect imposed a total ban on transport of E coal by the RailwaYs, at their instance and this action·was violative., of Art. ,14 and 19(1) (g) of the Constitution. The petitioners contended : (1) that the Railway Adminitration's action Of giving priority to some transporters o(. coal denying use of its transport facilities to the petitioners whO were similarly situated was disci'imlDatory in ch.aracter arid hence violative of Art.· 14 of the Constitution; (2) the orders dated April 1, 1972, December 31, 1980 and April 11 1981 imposed unresonabie restrictions on the' the freedom Or the petitioners F to.carry on their trade guaranteed by Art. 19(1) (g); (3) that sec. 27A is violative of Art. 19', l)°(g); ( 4) that para (iii) of priority 'C' of the Preferential Traffic ·Schedule in so far 3.s it permits special facility or ·preference to individuals or groups of peons selected by the sponsoring authority or recommending body " for transport of coat is ultrn Yireiz Sec. 27 A of the Act; · (5) order dated April 1 1· 1972 was violative of sec. 28 of the Act and was also violative of Art. 19(1) (g) of the Constitution. ·
Di~missing the writ.petitions,
H
HELD·: Railway is a mon!)polistic undettaking in the matter of.-tran.sport of cOat by' railways. Barring some tiny dots which may become visible only by a magnifying glass, ihe etire railway net work. is nationalistd and -ihe railway is a departmeJ;J.t of the Unin of Jndia. · It is therefore, indispµtably a State ,JDonopoly. A monopoly unless kePt withi~ l::Quns may prove to be a menac.
659
YlkLAi> coAL MERCl!A~T ii. UNION
Therefore, regulatory measures are necessary to prevent the abuse of mono-... polisti~ power. But there is a constitutional check on ihe State monoply, namely, it being State within the meaning of Art .. 12. of the Constitution, all its actions Will have to conform to the fundamental rights enshrined Part III in of . ·.J__,,. . the Constitution. Sec. 28 of the Indian Railways Act seeks to achieve the same ~ result which on the advent of the Constitution, Art. 14 woul~ achieve. But Sec~ 28 is subject to sec. 27A. If while giving effect to the orders of the Central J ·port Government issued under sec. 27A, priority of goods consigned to Central or Si ate G iS accorded in the matter ovCrnment or ·cl3.ss of of goods trans· 'specified in the .general or special order ·issued in thiS behalf, the action of the· railway administration ib complying with such special or general order could not be said as tentamountiog to gi".ing undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to in favour of any 'particul'ar ·person or railway administration and therefore violative of sec. 28. What sec. 28 fOrbids is discrimination in the matter of transport of goods against a class but this is subject to the permissible classification that would be introduced bY a special or generr orde.r issued by the Central Government in .e;xercise of the power conferred by sec. 27A . . It may be recalled that the Prefereritial Traffic Schedule according Priorit)'. •c• to transport of coal by those rneiltiOned therein has been issued in exercise· of . the power conferred by sec. 27 A. Therefore, the ·sbmission· that petitioners in the matter of transport of coal are similafly sitt ated with the Central or State Govern1nent ·or transporters given priOrity by general ot. special order issued under sec. 27 A cannot be entertained. This· is all the more so because the' petitioners are coal merchants who want to transport their coal by railway for carrying on business ill coal and they may sell the coal to any intendin8:...-purchaser while those accorded preferential treatment under Priority • C' of the Preferential Traffic SchCdule are transporters of coal who have been recognised One year in advance under Zonal Distribution Scl1eme as rersOns who would be transporting the-coal to satiSfy fixed goals which subserve needs of the public «t lrge. Classification of those cowred by Priority ·re' and the present petiti .. ocrs is founded on intellieible differentia which distin8uiShes pers:ons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group and the differentta has a rational relation to the object sought to be _ acpiev~d by the impugned orders .. Those fa1ling within Priority •c• (iii) Would 'from a class by themselves and the petitioners. clearly stand out of tile group. (679 A-H; 680 A-El
A
B
c
D
E
F
Nav Rattanmal and Ors. v. The State of 11,ajasthan, (1962] 2 S.C.R. 324 referred to. ~
/
Art. 19(1) (g).g.uarantees to the citi:Zen the fundamental freedon1 to carry on any occupation, trade or business. This fundamental freedom is ·subject to reasonable reStritions that can be imposed by law. relating to the carryin-g. on by the ·state, or by a corpOration owned or controlled by the State, of any trade._ business, -industry or service, whther to the exclusion complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise. Whenever the Court iS called upon to examine the complaint that restrictions imposed on the freedom to carry on trade are unreasonable, it is necessary to find out what is the trade or bllsiness of the complainant-petitioner and to what extent the restriction, if any, is imposed upon· the _freedom tci carry on trade or business and then to determine whether the restriction is reasonable or otherwise. It ~s th('. ~irect impact of the
G
H
660
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[198411 s.c.!l.
'A
restriCtion on the freedom to carry on trade·that has to be kept in view and not the ancillary or inciden'tal effect of the KQverntnental action on the freedom to - carry on tiade. [682 C-D; F-H]
In the instant case, if the law of den1and and supply and non--avaihibility of facility for loading Coal in smalls at wayside stations result in not making available 'wagons to the petitioners because of pre-planning and priority it cannot be said that there has been a total. ban oi;i the transport of coat offered by B the petitioners by railways, which would violate the fundamental .freedom to carrY on their trade guaranteed to the petitioners under Art. 19(1) (g). Jf the impugned orders constitute a restricticn on the·freedo .... 1 of carrying on trade, -though it is n.ot considered to be so, the san1e is reasonable and imposed in larger pUblic interest. Priffiafacie it appears lhaf the petitioners' businCss or tade as coal merchants is no way interfered with bf the railways by not beiilg c able to provide transport facility. Let it not be forgotten that the railway is not the only means of transport. There are.other means of transport by which the coal can be transported by the petitioners to their respective place where they carry on their business as the coal merchants. Even assuming that the direct' impact of the policy laid down by the railway admi.(listration purSuant to the orders of the central Governent under sec. 27 A results in denial of allotn1ent of wagon to the. petitioners, the restriction Will none·the-less be r·e.isonable D becaUse petitioners are not wholly denied the a11ot1nent of Wagons.
. \ ~..
[681 H; 682 A·B; 683 .A·CJ
A developing ouny with 'mixed economy and econn1ic planrling l1ave certain targets. to achieve. Thee targets are plannd in advance and the economic activity is geared tO the achieverpilnt of these targets. If the required E ·resources ne·cessary for achieving targets were readily available, no difficulty would arise .. But a j:le, eloping country has to so distribute its sca.rce resoues to a,chieve and accorilPlish desired targetS: This situation is bound to lead to a gap between the demand an~ supply of various facilities. Transport is one such. Once there is a gap between the deman,d for transport service offered by the railway and the supply of the service, the resources being not sufficient to meet With all existing demands, the !tcarce resources will have to be equitably F distributed keeping in view the planned target. Thh equitable · distribution would necessitate. impJ)osing of reasonabl& restrict!ons and according of priorities: [683 J?-F]
In the instant case, coal falls in Priodty 'C' (iii) in the Preferential Traffic Schedule being the· Primary source of energy, Planned regulated movement of ·G coal to meet priority needs if it results in denial of that· facility to non .. priority sector could not be rejected as placing an unreasonable restriction· on the. funda~ mental freedom to carry on trade or business. And that is the object underlying sec. 27A. Jt is therefore, idle to ~ontend that the section being violative of Art. 19(1) (g) is unconstitutional. [684 A-BJ
,
~-
H Annexure •B· to Prefefential Traffic Schedule sets out the list of sponsoring authrities. The list shows that ths Central 'and State Governn1ents as well as highly placed Central and StatC Government Officers ,have been appointed as sponsOring authority in respect ·of coS;l,required by diffeent area and ind~stries.
ViELAD COAL MERCHANT v. UNION
B
D
66i
• ;t·
·•
The tr·ansport of coal is according to a plan drawn up a year in advance. ~ Further this plan is subject to the decision of the Standing-Linkage ·Committee. Every meticulous detail is Worked out in advance. A daily loading of maximum number of wagons is pre-planned. Loading _of the wagons.with coal at a targeted nilmber daily requires rotational movement also according to ·plan. A w3.gon once loaded with coal when it moves out to the destination has a certain average return time stipulated and worked out in advance. Jn order to giv' effect to this planned moveµient abbreviation 'GX' is devised and appended to all the railway stations informing the transporters that the station _is not open for transport of coal in wagon loads. Coal in smalls can be· offered. for transport that is what tbe pet.itioners do not desire. All the regulatory measure clearly indicate that tranaport of coal is scientifi.Cally planned and devised in advance. All the impugned orders a.fe made for effective implemeniation of the planned movement of coal. If consistent with this planning, the railways have stoj)ped booking of c()a1 in wagon·load from wayside station, it cannd't 6e said that this reSulatory arrangement violateS sec. 28 of the Act and also that this• action has imposed such an unreasonable restriction 'on the fundamental freedom of the petitioners to carry on their trade aS'tO be violative of Art. 19(1) (g).
(685 A-B; F·H]
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : W.P.Nos. 6822,7350,7351,7457-58, 7461, 7609-18, 7625, 7637, 7638, 7945, 7966-68, 8003-04, 8007-08, 8068, 8078, 8088, 8196-t!220, 8358-60, 8361-63, 8378; 8505, 8832-33, 8912, 8917, 8918,,19, 9083, 9110, 9135-36/81, 13, 36, 112, 159, 969,. 2163, 2641, 7089, 7685,. 8004, 8119, 8187-88, 9186 & 9187/82, 7462 63/82, 7765~67/81, 160, 180, 1503/82, 1919/8.1, 1/82, 868, 1270, 1358, 2256, 2272, 4051-4052, 5123-26, 7147/82. • .
(Under article 32 of the Constitution of India)
Advocates for the Appearing Parties :
SS. Ray, N.R. Choudhary, K.K. Mohan, S.K. Sinha, R.C. Kohii, · R.S. Sharma, S. Mitter, N.S. Das Bahl, E.C. Agarwa/a, A.K. Mitra, H.K. Puri & K. Chatterjee, B. Datra, Rish; Kesh & M. Chopra., S.C. Gupta'& M. N. Shroff, S.K. Ghosh, D. Goburdhan, P. Mo/uinty, Abdul Khader, C. V. Subba Rao & _Dal,er Bhandari,
A
c
E
F
G
H
I
662 SUPREME COURT REPoRTs ( 1984) I S,C.R,
A
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
•
DESAI, J. When the hearing in this group of petitions concluded we pronounced the following order : · "All the Writ Petitions are. disinissed ·and any interim order in each matter is hereby . vacated. Jn the inatters which are listed as ready, the petitioner shall pay cost to ·the respondents in ·one set in each petition and there will · be no order to costs in the matters w4ich are shown as unready .
. C Reasons will follow."
Here are the reasons;
i
The petitioners, in this group of petitions, under Art. · 32 of D ' .· the Constitution are coal-.merchants, who, according . to them, have .been denied the use of the railways for transport of coal . from various coalfields and way-side statioo1s to their destinations by the / illegal and unconstitutional action of the railway administration. ·Constitutional conundrum invoked by them is the alleged violation of Art. 14 in that w.hile certain transporters of .coal have been E accorded priority in the matter of transport o( coal such as the Central and the S\ate Governments and the sponsored and. recomm. ended transporters, the petitioners who are coal merchants were denied equality of o.pportunity in the matter of transport of coal by railway. Their further grievance is that total prohibition of booking and transport of coal as requested by petitioners, by the railway administration, an instrumentality of the ·state envisaged by. Art. 12 F imposes an unreasonable restriction on their fundamental freedom to . carry on trade'guarnteed by Art. · 19(1) (g) of the Chnstitution and hence impugned orders are invalid. · · There are different petitioners from different areas voicing G their grievance against action of different zonal railway administrations·but the running thread in the catalogue of grievances is the sam~ and therefore a few representative facts to appreciate the contention as set out in Civil Writ Petition No. 8003-04 by M/s RaniH ganj Coal Corporation & Ors. may be briefly enumerated. This petition is adopted a,s represe!1tativc for the additional . reason that a yery comprehensive counter affidavit has bee·n filed·in it on· behalf of the respondents. '.
A
r
VIKLAD COAL MERCHANT v. UNION (Desai, J.)
66~
•
• '
Petitioners aver.that they arc coal ·traders and undertake · supply of coal and coke throughont India but in particular in the States of Punjab, Haryana and the Union Territory of Dclhj. They carry on the additional bu'siness of supplying 'lack coal purehased from .private collieries situated in the State of Meghalaya. In order to move coal from the c_ollieries to consumers, petitioners have to- transport coal from various stations served ·by· North-Eastern Frontier Railways (Meter gauge) New Gauhati and Badarpur Ghat in Silchar District in the State of' Assam and Meghalaya. For the purpose of transporting coal they have to indent wagons .as they want to transport coal in wagon-loads as the expression is under· stood in contra-distinction to smalls and clubbing. They submit indent for wagons according to the procedure prescribed .in the rele· vant rules. Petitioners aver that prior fo April I, 192, there wa no restriction on booking of.coal in wagon-loads. : The Govt. of India, Ministry of Railways issued an order dated April U 972 which reads as under : ·
"Govern~ent of India (Bharat Sarkar)· Ministry of Railways (Rail Mantralaya) Rai\way Board
B
c
n·
•
.No. TCR/15.10/71
New Delhi dated· Ist April 197J I 2~b Chaitra, 1894 . .
E
The Genera) Manager 11, India Railways
.The R.ailways Board have decided that in the list of abbreviations at page• 14 Chapter VI of the IRCA Alphabetical list of Railway Stations in India · (corrected . upto 31.3.79) an additional entry below the abbreviations 'G' should be incorporated· as under :
G
OX-Open for.goods, traffic of coal descriptions . excluding livestock, horse; large animals such as camels; elephants. etc. carriages on their wheels and motor cars but not open for outward booking of coal,. coal shale; lignite, patent fuel, shoft coke and hard _ coke in wagon loads.' ·
II
S!iI'ilEME COURT REPORTII i1984) 1 S.d.ll.
•
lA
The Railway Administrations are hereby · directed to · decide and notify the riames of stations to which this new provisions would apply and advise the General Se<:retary, . l.R.C.A. accordingly.
B
The General Secretary l.R.C.A. on receipt of the advice from the Railway Administrations should arrange to issue the necessary corrections, to the alphabetical list of Railway Stations.
c
Sd/· P.N Kalra, Dy. Director, Traffic (Rates) Rly. Board, New· Df'lhi, dated 1st April 72/12 Chaitra 64" '
.This is one of the. impugned orde;s in these petitions. The abbreviation IRCA used in-the impugned order means Indian Railway D Conference Association ('.!RCA' of short). The . IRCA has compiled and.issued an alphabetic list of All India Railway Stations and by a .suitable abbreviation as shown against the name of each railway station iri4ication is given about the facilities for traffic both goods and passenger available at different stations. As per the impugned E orier. when abbreviation 'GX' is appended to any railway station_it would inter·alia mean that the station is not open for outward booking of coal, coal-shale' etc. in wagon-loads. It appears tht the abbrevi' ation 'GX' has been appended to all way-side stations in the coal-belt, consquently no rnilway station in the coal-belt would be in a posi· · tion to book coal in wagon-loads from each such station. Conse· F quet\t upon the issuance of the impugned notification, tbe Govt. of. India revised Rule 302(i) of the Goods Tariff No .. 33 Part I issued by IRCA. - Further, the Chief Commercial Superintendent, Eastern Railway by a circular dated April 15, 1972 informedthe_ station sup_et'intendents and station-master~ of all the stations served by the G Eestern Railway that the entry 'OX' should be appended to all the ·stations within its jurisdiction. Thereafter-Govt. of India, ministry of Railways by its order dated April 27, 1972 issued an order revising Rule I and 2 of the Eastern Railway Coal Traffic Part I as under :
H
"All Traffic in coal, coal-shale,. lignite, patent fuel, soft. coke and bard coke in wagon loads · wilJ be loaded oniy from Colliery sidings, coke oven plants and waslie·
.. 665
B
E
Viki.AD COAL MFRCHANT v. UNION (Desai, J.)
•
ries on the Eastern Railways. Though invoices may be • issued as from the stations serving these colliery washerfos and coke oven plants, loading of coal in wagons will not be permitted at those stations. Loading and booking of coal is also.not permitted from any other station on the Eastern Railway. This traffic will be booked under the following forms of invoices :.-
a) "Weight only" invoices showing the weight and rate but not the calculated freight. b) "Paid" invoices . • c) "To p_ay"· invoices. 2. Coal will.be booked under "Paid" invoices only on the written request of the sender despatching the coal and provided the freight is tendered at the time of despatclt.
A·
c
, D
t wagons will be allotted only ·an availability and will be subject to observe of priority and other Rules that are , in force."
A further restriction followed when the Divisional operating Superintendent, Bi)aspur for apparent reasons stopped booking of . coal in smalls including clubbing at all stations of_ North-Eastern Railway. This restriction came into force on December 4, 1979. On February 11, 19so·a telegraphic communication was issed explain• ing that coal in wagon-loads can be booked· from colliery sidings. by the coalieries concerned. In other words, the coalieries booking the wagon must specify its hame in the indent Booking of slack coal was wholly stopped as per a phone call dated April 9, 1981. Petitioners. further contend that Union otindia, Ministry of Railways has issued Preferential Traffic Schedule in exercise of power conferred by sec. 27A of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 ("Act' for short). This Preferential Traffic Schedule provides for preferential treatment iil transport of good.s from various stations. ·It p(ovides five inter se prorities A to E. Different kinds of coal falls undCr priority 'C' (Ill) which reads as under:
F
G
H
(iii) Coal from collieries in accordance with commodity quotas laid down from time to time for /certain types
·,
'
<br>
667
-:-+
VIKLAD COAL MERCHANT v. u.NION (De6ai, J.)
r!-
l.
/
altered/modified from time to time .• Within the same . ' class or category of consumers seniority may be fixed • from time to iime depending upon ihe 'operational and other considerations.• .Rai\wai Administration.I Director, Movement (Railway) may permit distress allotmentslsupply of wagons when considered nece·ssary'. ·Nothing laid down herein shall be considered as contrary to· notes (a) to (b) appearing under Priority 'E'." -
Priority 'E' also includes coal from collieries in accordance with targets laid down from time to time from the different fields and in accordance with the zonal scheme applicable to each field and the principle of transport rationalisation already in force. Petitioners contend that ·sum total of various · restrictions including one dated April 1. 1972 introducing abbreviation 'OX' and the Preferential Traffic Schedule specifying priorities under section 27 A of the Act in their cumulative effect impose a total ban on transport of coal by the Railways, at their instance and this action is violative o( Art. 14 · a.nd/19(l)'(g) of the. Constitution.
A very detailed affidavit bas been filed on behalf of the respon: dents·. Some ·of its highlights may be noticed. . •
·111dian Railway net-work serve 7000 railway staiions, scores of divisioi{s and 9 zones. ·In such an extensive net-work, all kinds ·of factilities by their very nature cant)ot be provide<\ at all stations, ·nor can all kind.s of traffic be lifted and moved from all stations. The Railways, have therefore to plan and rationalise movement of various commodities from various loading points to various destina, tions and in various directions. It is said that till recently coal was the primary source of energy._ It bein.g an important commodity it bas t..o be accorded such high priority being . the primary source of . energy, that a senior omcer called Direttor, Movement (Railways) is posted with headquarters at Calcutta and he controls and co•ordinates all movements of coal by rail. As far back as 1945, the· Ocivt of . India by its resolution No. Coal 119 (I) dated December 4, 194S appointed a' Committee called the Indian Coalfields Committee which submitted its report in 1946. ·Amongst various other recommen·· dations, the Committee suggeste<i that in view of the shortage of transport, it is imperative that increased attention be given to zonal
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
668
SUPRBME COUl\T RBPORTS
E
(19841 j S.C.R
A
B
c
D
F.
G
H
distribution of coal. It further notices that coal is invariably transported in full wagon-loads and at times despatched from depotstations in full train loads and the'refore if any general revision' of freight is undertaken in consequence of increased cost of operation of the railways, the preferen'tial treatment now accorded to coal should be maintained. Statistical data relied upon in the report was annexed to the counter-affidavit. It ·is averred that railway has· to rationalise movement of coal because daily on an average l 0,000 wagons are required for movement and transport of .coal all over the country. 111 order to explain why booking of coal from way-side stations is prohibited, it is averred that the Dir.ector, Movement (Railways) assesses the likely availability of wagons in a coming year for the movement of.coal. After ascertaining the available capacity he advises Central Govt. and various State·Govts. with a request to sponsor coal traffic as per the requirement and policies. The whole programme of transport of coal from coalfields and coalieries to various points in Tndia is worked.out in advance keeping in. view the daily despatch of loaded wagons and re_turn of enipty wagons so as to be available for daily requirement of empty wagons. A chart is annexed - to this counter-affidavit in which the average loading of coal in wagons per day iil set out. :Jn a letter dated December 21,1981 by the Director, _Movement (Railways) to Chairman of the Railway Board, it is stated that coal loading. the month is 1.0,478 per day compared to 10,121 wagons per day during October, 1981. .A compartive breakage of loading during some months has· been set out. showing the number of wagons indented, the number of wagons allotted and the number of wagons loaded and the percentage of loading against offer. It is also stated in the counter-affidavit that the Department of Coal, in the Ministry of Energy bas set up a standing linkage committee whose fuctions to assess and link the requirements to particular sources of coal so as to provide this primary energy material to establishments like the Railways, Thermal Power Stations, Fertiliser Plants, Cement Plants, Steel Plants, Textile factories, Chemical Industries and like. The Committee assesses the requirements of various industrial units, consumers establishments and other consumers located in different parts of the ~ountry and thereafter taking into account the. production programme of various collieries, it links the requirements of various consuming units to · different individual coal-fields, and this linkage is reviewed frm time to time as the situation may necessitate. The availability of wagons is an in.tegral part of this linkage programme.· After specifying these facts, it is averred that this annual allotment drawn in advance
\
•
•
V!KLAD COAL MERCHANTS Y. UNION (Desai, J.) ~69
cannot be disturbed by casual indent for transporting coal. It is further averred that the railway is a carrier which has to chop its own priority programmes keeping in view the public interest of, rushing various commodities to different parts of the country. If' in the process some individuals may not get a chance to transport their commodities, the actio~ of the railway administration is neither violative of Art. 14 or 19 (I) (g) of the Constitution.
A
B
.,
There are some averments in the counter-affidavit casting some doubt about the trade carded on by the petitioners but we consider . the same irrelevant for the purpose of disposing of these petitions.
...
A number of learned counsel addressed the Court on different facets of almost the same identical contentions. We would, however, only deal with the basic contentions raised . . in these petitions.
At the outset, a brief reference to some of the provisions of the Act would facilitate the examination of the· contentions canvassed before us. Sec. 27 of the Act casts a duty on tb_e railway administra· tion to arrange for receiving and forwarding Q"affic without unreason· able delay andwithout partiality. Sub-sec. 1 of sec. 27 reads as" under: ""27). Duty of railway administrations :10 arrange for receiving and forwarding traffic without unreasonable delay and without partiality :-: (I) Every railway adminisration shall, according. to its powers, afford all reasonable facilities for the receiving, forwarding and delivering'of traffic upon and from th.e several railways belonging to or worked by it and for the· return of rolling-stock." Sec: 27 -A which was introduced by the Amending. Act No. .11 of 1950 confers power on the Central Govt. to give directions in regard to transport of goods by railway administration. It reads as under:
"27 A. Power of Centrar Government to give directions in regard to transport of goods by railway . administrat1on·(I) The Central Governm.mt may, if in its opinion it is necessary in the public interest so to do, by general or special order, ·direct any railway administration- ' .
C
D
E
F
G
H
670 SUPRl!MB COURT REPORTS · [1984) l s.c.ll. • (a) to give special facilities for, or. preference to, the A transport of ·any such goods or class of goods consigned to the Central Government . or to the Government of anY State or of such .other goods or . class of goods, as may be specified in the order; B (b) to carry any goods or class of goods by such route or the order. route~ and at such rates as may be specified . . in (2) Any order made under sub·section (1) shall cease to have effect after the expiry of six months from the c dte thereof, but it · may be renewed from time to time. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, '- every railway administration shall be bound to D comply with any direction .given under sub-section (I). any action taken by a railway administration in pursuance of any such direction shall not be , deemed to be a contravention of Section 28." Section -2 prohibits giving undue preference by railway administra- .E tion. It reads as under : "28. Prohibition of undue preference:-A railway adminis• tration shali not make or give any undue or unrea. ,. sonable prefei'nce or· advantage to, or .in favour of, F ·any particular prson or · railway administra.tion, or any particular description, of traffic in any respect whatsoever, or subject any particular person or rai!~ay administration or any particular description of traffic to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever." G In exercise of the power conferred by Sec. 27A Central Govt. issued Preferential Traffic Schedule directing that all railway adminis.. trations shall give special facilities for or preference to the transport of goods ·or class of goods specified in the Schedule to the order. H Amongst Priority ~A' to 'E' there is inter se priority and when unde; one Priority various goods or class of goods arc . clubbed together they have inter se priority- amongst themselves. Coal falls under
671
VllllLAD COAL l,!EiCHANT v. UNION (Desai, J.)
. •·
Priority ·c•. Coal has to be moved. from collieries in accordance with commodity quotas laid. down from time to time for certain types of coal and/or in accordance with programmes and movements • sponsored or recommended by the Coal Controller and/or any Committee appointed by him and/o.r the State Governments, and/or other recommending authorities and· accepted by the Railway administrations and/or Director, Movement (Railways), Calcutta and 'in accordance with the Zonal Scheme applicable to each coal-field from time to time. A list of sponsoring : authorities authorised to sponsor coal movements under priority C(iii) is set out in Annexure 'B' to the Sched~le. ·The expression 'coal' has' the same meaning as defined in the Colliery Control Order. There is a further provfoion under Item (iii) that besiaes the sponsoring. authority mentioned in Annexure B, movement of coal may ·be sponsored by' 'any other authoriiy who may 'be appointed by the Govt. from time to time."
A
B
C
' . .
Sec. 27provides for smooth flow of traffic throughout. the. length and breal!th of the country._ The expression 'traffic' is defined to include rplling stock of every description as well as passengers, animals and goods. A duty is cast on every railway administration to afford reasonable facilities for receiving, forwarding and delivering of traffic upon .and from several railways beloµging to or worked by it and for the ret-urn of rolling stock. This is necessary because the railway net work is divided into various railway ·such as Western Railway, Central Railways, meaning zonal railway administration and prior to nationalisation of the railways different companies operated different railwnys. Sec. 27 wa~ ena,cted in the last decade of 19th Century when different compani~s had set up the railway net work in different parts of the country, In order to . provide for. smooth flow of' traffic thwarting the railway administrations creating their own preferences, throughout the length and breadth of . the country it was made obiigatory by Sec. 27 that every railway railway administration shall_afford reasonable facilities for receiving, forwarding and delivering traffic and for return of the rolling stock. Sec. 27-A was introduced in 1950 with a view to conferring power on the Central Govt. to give directions in regard to transport of goods ·by railway administration .• In 1950 railways· were the primary. carriers of passengers and goods throughout the length and breadth . of the country. Road transport was then in its infancy and river navigation was practically unknow.n. On the advent of the independence and as a resuH of planned economy, there was a spurt in industrial activity with the result that demand from the ~railways for·
D
E
F
G
ff
672
il984] l s.c;R.
S)PRBME CO)RT REPORTS
,
V!KLAD COAL MERCHA!-iT v. UNION (Desai, J.) . 673
t
. 1~ · 4
Armed with thq.power conferred by Sec. 27 A the Central . .Government has·issued what is.called Preferentil Traffic Schedule. It ;Jrescribed five priorities'/' to 'E' with inter se priorities amongst 'A' to 'E' to be accorded by the railways· fof · transport of certain goods or class of goo.ds specified under each category. · A brief reference to various Priorities 'A'· to 'E' would at a glance show how the priorities have been .. determined in pblic and national foterest. The Gener;tl Order No. 68 directs that in exercise of the powers eonterred by Sec. 27 A cif the 'Act, the Central Government directs that all Railway Administrations shall give special facilities for or preference ·to the transport of goods'class of goods specified in the schedule to 'this order. Goods included in Priority' A' cover all moves of immediate and operational nature ordered by the Quarter Master General's Branch through Milrail, whiclr will be · marked. 'Immediate' in respect of Personnel, Vehicles a_nd Stores, Military Special.irains and · ' immediate Operational demands. Demands of the Military ·have been accorded the highest priority. for the security of the nation .. Priority 'B' includes fo6dgrains', fertilisers, edible groundnut .'cake: Iron and Steel etc. Next to national security hunger has been given priority. Priority 'C' incfodes inter alia coal from collieries. Coal has till . recently been the primary 'source <if energy and · yet it · receives its place in Priority 'C'.. ·Energy thus gets Priority 'C'. · Priority 'D'· -includes raw materials and finish.ed product from Asbestos Cement . Industry, Cotton seed; foodstuffs such/pulses, fresh dates, perishable ~ommodities subject to . quota etc. i'riorits ''E' is praqtically a residuary clause which again involves coal from collieries ·is accordance. with the targe.ts laid down from .time to time' from the different· · ·fields and"in accordance' with the zonal scheme applicable tci each field and the principle of transport rationalisation already in force-but not falling within Priority 'C' (iii). ·
B
c
D
E
F
In the backdrop of this legal position, we may now turn to the . contentions raised on behalf of I.he peti'tioners ..
G
.H
..
. ' .
•
c
D
F
674
(198411 &.C.R.
SUPREME. CQURT REPORTS
• they are unconstitutional.
4. In any view of the matter; Para. (iii) of Priority 'C' of the Preferential Traffic Schedule issued by the. Govermnent of India in exercise of the power conferred by Sec. 27A in so far as it permits special faci· lily or preference to individu~ls or groups of persons selected by the Sponsoring Authority or recommen· ding body for transport of.coal is ultra Vires Sec. 27A. · of the Act.
. ducing abbreviation 'GX' and appending to all ·railway stations denoting that each suc\l station is riot open for outward bookiug of, coal, coal ·shale, lignite, patent fuel soft coke and hard coke in wagon loads is violative Sec.- 28 because thereby the railway
' administration has subjected the petitioners as well as the coal offerred for transport to an undue and
~.
G
H
"IKLAO COAL MERCHANT v. UNION (JJesai, J.) 67$
:+ . Re Ground I : Railway is a common carrier ad being State·owned it is subject :10t only to the provisions of the Act hut also the fundn" mentalrights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution, .• However much 'before the advent of the Constitution. when different Railways. _J ·· were owned by incorporated companies, · Sec. 28 . of the Act ' precluded the different railway administrations from granting undue preference to any particular person or any· particular traffic or to any particular raiiway administration, _or subject anyone to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in the matter of transport of goods ·or passengers. Railway being a Stale monoply, to chckmate its monopolistic·power in the larger public interest it has to be subjected to regulatory measures. Simultaneously it became necessary .to arm Central Government .with power to direct railway . 'r administrative to give preference in the matter of transport of the goods. of the Government,, central or State or specified go·ods to meet the demands of various regions as. we Ii as needs of Government. Intention was to classify government ina class by. itself for ibe purpos~ of Art. 14. To meet.the challenge of Art. 19 (I) (g) the Central Government was armed with power to accord priority in transport of goods in larger public interest. Soon after· the advent i of the Constitutions; to arm the Central. Government with requisite power to direct the railway administration to give special facilities for or preference to the transport of any such goods or class of goods consigned to the C,entral Government or to the Government of any State or such other goods or class of goods as may be specified in the · order, Sec. 27A was -introduced in the Act which enabled it by a general or special order to direct the railway administration to grant special facilities for or preference to the transport of goods. Such a general or special order can be issued by the Central Government if in its opinion it is necessary in .the public interest to do so. Now indisputably the goods consigned to the Central Government or to Government of any State must obviously have a priority ove'r what ~ we may loosly describe as ·private transporters, because it is well· · settled that the Central or the. State Government is in a class by itself. This view is founded on the assumption, that all activities of the State are in public interest in the. sense that they are· either · undertaken on behalf of the public or 'that the loss or gain arising form them falls upon the public (See Nav Rattanma/ and Others v. The State of Rajasthan.(1 ) The goods consigned to the Central or the State.Government are, unles~ shown to the cvntrary necessarily to be
B
c
D
F
G
H
(I) [1962)2 S.C.R. 324.
• ·~.
67(> S,Ul>RBME COURT RBPoR ts t19S4] 1 s.c.a.
,
. . ' -, :Armed with the power conferred by Sec. 27A the Central Government has .issued Preferential Traffic Schedule. Priorities 'A'
677
•
D
VJKLAD COAL MERCHANT v. UNION (Desai, J.)
. to 'E' therein set oui in the matter of transport of goods by railway clearly manifests 'a. public policy framed to subserve public. intrest. Coal the primary source of enrgy has been Telegated below the . military requirement '(Priority 'A'). and foodgrains and fertilisers, Iron and Steel material for wagon bilding, seeds etc.· (Priority 'B') and then comes the primary source of energy in Priority 'C' .Co11l. Does this prior;ty manifost undue· preference prohibited by Sec. 28 or a general· order· issued 'by, the Central Government in· public interest.?·
A
B
Let orie i;onfusion be 'cleared at the outset.. Submission that ·there i.s virtually a total embargo on the transport of coal by. ·railway at ihe·instance 6ft.he present petitioners or others similarly. situated is.substantially incorrect. •Throughout the hearing of these petitions, it was pepeated ad nauseum that cumulative effect of all orders, includig the impugned order datd April I, 1972, is to impose a total ban o.n the transport· of coal offered bi!: the petitioners. As w)ll be . presently· pointed out, this statement is · unfounded in · fa.cts and pr~sents a distorted picture in the· matter ·of transport of coal J?y railways.
•
>
· E
F
G
•
H
•
678
[1984] 1 s.c.il.
SUPREM~ coURt REPORTS
an exhaustive and detailed provision is made is . not difficult to A . · answer? Coal forms 32% of the total transport of goods hadled by the Railways. On an average, more than 10,000 wagons will have to be allotted daily for transport -of 9oal. Coal being a primary . source of energy used by heavy industries, electricity generating plants, steel plants as also cooking fuel used in the remotest parts of the country, it is necessary to handle its transport with scientific precision. B Therefore, there is a prior planning abour a year in · advance drawn up by the Director, Movement (Railways) setting out Zonal Scheme of distribution applicable to each coal-field ·and the principles of transport rationalisation in force from time to time. The purpose. underlying setting up 'of sponsoring and recommending authorities is. c to ascertain the needs of various regions of the country who in tbi:ir respective regions would be in clos and intimate contact "with the consumers of coal both industr.ial and individual. Even though· pbwer bas been conferred on them to spousor or recommend. indenting of wagons of coal from collieries this network of sponsoring and recommending authorities are subject to the Zonal Scheme applicable D to each coal field and the principles of transport rationalisation in force from time to time. The nerve centre is the Director, Movement (Railways) of all the activities connected with tra·nsport of coal. In· addition to this the Government has set lip a Standing Linkage Committee in the Department of coal in the Ministry of Energy . E . This Committee assesses the link and requirement of particular source of coal. The Committee keeps in view the requirements of such major industries and, establishments using coal like the RailWays, thermal power stations, fertiliser plants, c.emerit plants steal plants, ·textile factories, chemical industries and the like. This very narration would show that if there is disturbance in regular supply of coal to this priority sector resulting in their closure, there would be a ripple ·effecting various ancillary industries creating a major dislocation in ··in the national economy and escalating haunted spectre of layoff .and unemployment. Jhat is why planning is undertaken every year in. • ·advance and but for any emergency it is considered inadvisable to G disturb .the advance Planning because any such disturbance ·results in seriou~ dislocation of this primary source of energy being distributed • all over' the country keeping in.view national priorities.
A
•
, With this backgound, it is no difficult to appreciate the H. various orders issued, by the Railway Administration and the Central •Government regulating the movement of coal.
•
679 .
•
\IIKLAb COAL MERCHANT v. UNION (lJesai, J:) .
Railway is a monopolistic undertaking. in the· matter of transport of coal by Railways. Barring some tiny dots which may become v'isible only by a magnifying. glass, the entire railway network is nationalised and the railway is a department of the Union of India. It is therefore, indisputably a State monopoly. A monopoly unless kept within. bounds may prove to be a menace, . Therefore, regulatory measurs are necessary to preven the abuse of monopolistic power. The reasons which led to the- enactment of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act may have to 'be ·kept in view even while keeping a watch over ,the activities of a ·State· monopoly. But there is a constitutional check on the State monopoly, nam'ely, it being State within the meaning of Art." 12 of the Constitution, all its actions will have to conform to the fundamental rights ensl;frined in Part III of the Constitution. P!trt Ill provides a .positive and healthy · check on the railway administration. Sec, 28. of the Act seeks to achieve the same .result which on the advent of the Constitution, Art. 14 would achieve. Sec. 28 undoubtedly prohibits railway administration from giving any undue preference by arbitr.arily picking and choosing some out of those seeking to use its serviCes and facilities. But Sec. 28 is subject to Sec .. 27 A. If the railway administration -accords priority in transport of goods by giving ·special facilities fur orprefeence fo the transport of goods, in compliance with any general or special order made by the Central Government in the public interest in this behalf, compliance wJth such special or general order could never be attacked as being violative of Sec. 28. · Sec. 28 forbids discrimination by ,giving undue or unreasonable preference or advantage in respect ·of any particular traffic to any particular person or any other railway admiilistration but' this general prhibi· tion against discrimination is subject to the ·overriding power conferred on Central Government under Sec. 27 A. If whiie giving effect to the orders of the Central Government i.ss.ued under · Sec. 27 A, priority is accorded in the matter of transport of goods consig• ned to Central or l>tate government or class of goods specified in the general or special order issued iirthis behalf, the action of the railway administration in complying with such special or general .order, -could not be said as tentamounting to giving undue or .unreasonable · pooference or advantage to or in favour ofany particular person or· railway administration. Wh_at Sec. 28 forbids is discrimination. in the matter of transpo_rt of goods against a class but. thi~ is subject to
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
D
•
A
B
c
·E
F
G
H
"680 ..
(1984) 1-s.c.a.
SliPRilME COliRt _REPORTs
'ihe permissible classification that W·<?uld be introduced by a . special ar general order issued by the Central Government in exercise of the power conferrd by Sec. 27 A. It may be recalled that the Preferential Traffic Schedule a"cordirig Prjo.rity '(;' to transport of coal by those mentioned therein has beei;i issued in exercise of the power conferred . by Sec, 27 A. Therefore, the submission that petitioners in the ·matter of transport of coal are similarly situated wjth the Central or Stte Government or. transporters give.n priGfity by" general or special order issued under ·sec. :27 A cannot be entertained. This is all the more· so because the petitioners are coal merchants who ·want to transport their coal y'railway for carrying on business in coal and they may sell the coal to any intending purchaser while those accorded preferential ·treatment.under Priority 'C' of the Preferential Traffic Sch,dule are transporters of coal who have been recognised one· year in advance · tinder Zonal Distribution Scheme as Y,erson who would by· trans· porting the ·coal to satisfy fixed goals. which subserve needs. of the public at large. For this additional reason the contention·. of the petitioJ1ers thar they are· similarly _situated with those set out in. Priority 'C' (iii) cannot , be . entertained. Classification of those covered by Priority. 'C' and. the present petitioners is founded on intelligible. differentia which. distinguishes persons or thigs . that are grouped together from others left out of . t)le . group · and the differentia has a ·rational rela.tion·to the object sought to be .achieved by the impugn'd order; .. Tbo;e falling within .Priority 'C' (iii) wonld .form a class by themselves and the .petitioners clearly stand out of. 'the group and for re.a_sons her.ein stated petitioners could not be said· to be similarly situated with those. grouped together in. Priority 'C' (iii).
Re Gr. 2 :. It was next contended that ihe impugned orders .. dated ·April l, 197l, December 31, 1980 and April 11, 1981 in their cumµlative effect have imposed a total ban on the. transport of coal offered by the petitioners by the.Railways and thereby jmposed an unreafonable restriction on their fundamental freedom to carry on their trade guaranteed by Art. J 9(l)(g) of the- Constitution. It is ·.factually incorrect to say that' . the impugned- orders have in·. their cumulative effect imposed a total ban on the transport of coal offered by th_e petitioners by Railway. ·Priority 'E' in Preferential Traffic Schedule ·provides for transport of coal from collieries in 'accordance with· the targets laid down from time to time from the !ifferent. fields and in accordane with the Zonal Scheme applicable to .each· field and t]le principle offransport rationalisation already ·in force. Priority !C'
. _., ....
.,
•
.
·. VIKi.All CoAt MEltCllANt v. UNION. (Desai, J.) · 681
A
B
•
(iii) caters to transport of certain types of coal as·recommended and sponsored by recommending and sponsoring authorities. Priority "E' (ii) caters. io a situation where c6al is required to be tnnsported .from collieries in accordance with the targets laid down in advance. Therefore, if the petitioners are unable to obtain any sponsorship or · recommendati6n for transpot of coaLby Railway, they may as well · come under Priority 'E' (ii): Assuming 1hey even ·do not. coine. • within the sweep of Priority 'E' '(ii}, it is crystal clear that any avai\able wagon after all priorities .are satisfied can be made available to . the petitioners.· If even then wagons are not allotted to petitioners, they can complain of violation of Sec.,2&: But it was urged that the Priority 'A' to '.E' have been so .exhaustively drawn up that conceivably not a single wagon would be available. afier all the. priorities are met with.· That may be so but that is unavoidable when the iaw ·of demand and supply operates. There is always an yawing gap · between the demand for the wagon and the available supply of the same. That situation itself would justify making of orders under Sec . . 27A. If the railways were in a positio.nto meet with everyc demand ofthe wagon:ror transport of goods, it was absol4tely unnecessary to. provide for priority. The very fact that. the.re is a discernible gap between the demand for the wagons and. the supply of.the same that led to t;he necessity of introducing Sec . .27 A and making a general mder drawing up Preferential Traffic. Schedule in .. exercise' of the power cMferred by Sec. 27 A .. Further it was said that.,coal can be transported in smalls from certain wayside stations not suffixed,with abbreviation 'GX'. But the petitioners want .to transport their. coal in. wagon loads. The Railways may not be able to provide won from the wayside stations because each . empty wagon at ·wayside ·station is accounted for in the daily §Upply.ofwagons approximately · 10,000for tansport of coal from. colliery siding to various destinations in the country. loaded wagon may reaeh a wayside station and . ' If may be as the petitioners contend thqt a . ' . is unloaded but the . counter-affidavit shows that each such empty wagon is acco'unted for, · ';\ year in ad,vance towards supply pf .more than 10,000 wagons. daily. -tR• the colliery sidings for transport of coal. .. And this . pre-planning cannot be disturbed by excluding such wagons fromthe calculations. about available wagons and had it over to the ·petitioners. There is a:further difficulty .in making available wagons· to the petitioners. · Every; small' wayside station is not equipped with necessary equipment for loading of coal. Therefore, if the law of demand and supply, and non~availability of facility for loading coal in small ai wayside' statior,is resulhn not making available_ wagons to ihe petitioners
G
II
B
682
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1984] 1 s.c.I,
A
because of pre-planning and priority it cannot be said that there has · been a total ban on the transport of coal offered by the petitioners by the railways, which would violate the fundamental freedom to carry ' on their trade guaranteed to the petitioners under Art. 19(1)(g). If .the impugned orders constitute a restriction on the freedom of · carrying on trade, though we. do not consider ft to be so, the saiiie is reasonable and imposed in larger public interest. The contention must accordingly be rejected.
Re Gr. 3: It was next contended· that if upon its ·true · construction . Sec. 27A enables the Central ·Government to impose a total ban on c transport of coal offered by the petitioners . who are traders in coal, . Sec. 27A would be violative of Art. 19(l)(g) and should be declared unconstitutional. Art. 19(l)(g) guarantees to the citizmthe fundamental freedom to carry on any occuption, trade or business .. This fundamental freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions that can be imposed by law relating to the carrying on by the State, or by a· .corporation owned or controlled by the State; of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion complete or partial, of ~ cititens or otherwise. ·
· The first question that may be posed in this context is : wtat is the trade being carried ori bY the petitioners? Are they coal transporters ? Is the transport of coal their business ? Or are they coal mercharits who are dealers in. coal and for the purpose of carrying on ·of business at a certain place they are required to transport coal from the colliery sidings to their place of business ? Obviously their 15usiness is not transport of coal. Transport is merely incidental to their F business, namely, trade in coal. Assuming that the Railways have wholly banned transport of coal offered by the petitioners by wagons coufd it be saiCI that the action of the Railways would violate Art. 19(l)(g) in relation to them. Wheneer the Court is called upon to examine the complaint that restrictions imposed on the freeaom to G· . carry on tr;de are unreasonable, it is necessary to find out what is · the trade or business of the complainant-petitioner and.to what extent 4 ·the restriciion, if any, is imposed upon the freedom to carry on trade or business and then to determine whether the. restriction is reasonable or otherwise. It is the direct impact of the· restriction on the H freedom to carry on tra ie that bas to be kept in view and not' the ancillary or incidental effect of the governmental action on te freedom to car·ry on trade. The petitioners are not transporters of coal. They are coal .marchants scattered over varions. parts in
VIKLAD COAL MERCHANT v. UNION (Desai, J.) 683
A
B
D
E
F
G
! •
H
1-
India and now they complain that they ~re unable to tran,sport coal because the Railways have so arranged its prforities in the matter of transport of coal that the petitioners would never .be able to obtain a single wagon for transport. of their coal. Prima facie it appears· that the 11etitioners·' business or trade as coal merchant is in no way interfered with by the raiiways by not being able to provide transport facility. Let it not be forgotten that the railway is· not .the·· only means of transport. There are other means of transport by which . the coal can be transported by the petitioners to their respective place where they .carry on their business as the coal merchants. Even assuming that the direct impact of the· policy · laid down by the railway administration }lursuant to the orders of the Central Government under Sec. 27 A results in denial ·of allotment of wagon to . the petioners, the restriction will none-the-less be reasonable because petitioners are not wholly denied the allotment of wagons.
c
A developing country with mixed economy and economiC planning have certain targets to achieve. These. targets are planned in advance and the economic acrivity is geared . to the achievement of these targets, If the required resources necessary for achieving targets were readily available, no difficulty would arise. But a developing country has to .so distribute it~ scarce resources to achieve · and accomplish desired targets. This sitqation is bound to lead to a gll> between the demand and supply of various facilities. Trans· port is one such. Once.there is a gap between the demand for transport service offered by the Railway arnl the supply of the service, the resources being not sufficient to meet with all existing demands, the scarce resources will have to be equitably distributed keeping in view the planned targets. · •
This equitable distribution would necessitate imposing of . reasonable restriction and according of priorities. Coal as pointed out earlier being the primary source of energy, the demand for it to keep wheels .of industry rotating is very high · and it has to be accor· ded a fairly high priority and that is done by the Preferential Traffic Schedule. Only two other items have a priority over coal and 'they are in respec!°of Personnel, .Vehicles and Stores, Military Special trains and immediate Operational demands that. is nati,onal security. This does not require. any explanation because national security has the highest priority, and it is accorded Priority 'A.'. Priority 'B' provides for foodgrains, edible oils, goods in connection with relief and .rehabilitation of displaced persons, seeds etc. H1:1nger has been
(198411, s.c.a .
. 1
684
. SUPREME COURT REPORTS
accorded.Priority 'B'. · And coal falls in Priodty 'C' being the primary source of energy, Planned regulated. movement of . coal to . meet priority needs if it results in denial of tliat facility to non-prio• rity·sector could not be rejected as placing an unreasonable· restri~ ction on the fundamental freedom to carry on. trade or business. And that is the objecrunderlyirig Sec. ·27A. It is therefore, idle to contend that the section being violative of Art .. 19(1)(g) is unconsti-· . tutional. · ' ·
~ - · Re Gr. 4 : . It was next contended that in so far as Priority .C(iii) in the matter or'transport of cqal from colliery sidings permits special facility or preference to individuals or groups of persons c se)ected by sponsoririg aut\10rity or recommending body for transport of coal, it is ultra vires Sec. 27A of the Act. One has merely to look at the list of sponsoring and recommending authority to reject · this submissin. Annexure 'B' to Preferential Traffic Schedle sets out the !1st of sponsoring authorities · It is a long list but a bar~ perusal of it is sufficient to sho1v at a glance that Central and_ State D Governments as well as highly placed _Central and State Government Ofi)cers have been appointed as spo_nsoring authority in respect of coal required by different area and industries. Again in various States- various sponsoring'· authorities have been set up . by _State Government.· Power is confered on these sp0nsoring authorities , to . sponsor persons who would be accorded priority in transport oj; coal. E . These responsible persons and bodies set up in each State as sponsoring authority 'arc expected to aet in a responsible manner keeping . in view the demands of the area and the industry,~ for coal {n each State. It i~ therefore, idle to contend that setting up of sponsoring or recommending .authority in Priority C(iii) of the Preferential. F Traffic Schedule ls ultra vires Sec. 27A of the Act.·
c
R~ Gr. 5 : It was next contended· that the Order No ... TO (g) 1510/71 dated Apil 1,1972 introducing of abbreviatio.n 'GX' and appending it to all railway stations has resulted in every such station befog not open for outward booing of ·coal, coal shale, lignite etc. G ·.in wagon. loads and'therefore it violates Sec. 28 of the . Act because· thereby petitioners are wholly prohibiie_d from transporting their coal by railway and, making every empty w_agon available io those covered by J'riority C(iii). · lt wai said that the order dated April. !,1972 has the pernicious tendency of giving u·ndue preference-to ' H ·Priority 'C'(iii) trnsporters and subject petitfoners to undue or · unreasonable prejudice.or disadvantage, both situations_ being prohibited by Sec. 28. As pointed out earlier, . transp~rt of . coal is
'·-· \
-.\·
VIKLAD COAL MERCHAN'f v. UNIO.N (Desai: J.) 685
F
..
1·
)
) ,,,; ,.
according to a pian drawn up a yeadn advance: Further this pfan is subject to the decision of the Standing Linkage"Committee~ Every · meHculous detail is. worked out in .advance. A daily loading of maximum number' of wagons is pre-planned. Loading of t_he wagons with coal at a targate<I number daily requires rotational movement out also according to plari. to its destination has a certain average return time stipulated and .A . wagon once. loaded with coal it . .. . moves , ·worked oui in . .advance. There may ·be dislocations. In orde.r to meet ·this eventuality ·in the counter,affidavit it is 'stated ·that no wagon· load of coal can be booked from wayside stations. It can only be booked from colliery sidings and that ought to be so. To achieve this desired end, an abbreviation '.GX' was· devised and appended to all stations. Where a station bas an abbreviation'GX' appended to it, it would J:!lean that the station is nof operi for outward booking of coal,. coai shale, lignite, patent fuel, soft coke an<! · hard coke in wagon loads. We fall to see· how: this iegulatory arrangement .violates Sec. 28. In' fact, this incidental arrangement helps in smoothly working the Zonal Distribution Scheme arid the ·planned movement ·of coal. And it is not disputed· that· the coal in ·smalls, if offered and if the· space is available can be moved from wayside stations: · Therefore, we find no meflt in' the submission.
B
C.
D
E
G
H
•
686
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1984] 1 s.c.R.
..
We cannot part with this judgment without recording our A uninhibited appl'lociation of thorough study of the knotty issues, re.search and analysis of historical background, and_ scientific and painstaking presentation of the facts and issues of law involved in these petitions by Shri Gupta learned counsel, who appeared for ,the various railway administrations. The intense labour put in by B hiin in collecting the most useful ma\arial and elucidating the same before the Court in a very able manner helped. us considerably ill disposing of these petitions. •
,,.
These are the reasons which persuaded us to make the order · set out at the commencemant of the judgment.
c
H.S.K.
Petitions dismissed.
•
·~ .
. '
.•
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the railway's preferential treatment of certain coal transporters under orders issued under s. 27A was discriminatory and violative of Article 14.
Whether the cumulative effect of the impugned orders imposed an unreasonable restriction on the petitioners' freedom to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g).
Whether section 27A of the Indian Railways Act and Priority 'C'(iii) of the Preferential Traffic Schedule were unconstitutional or ultra vires.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nav Rattanmal and Ors. v. The State of RajasthanReferred
[1962] 2 S.C.R. 324 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Viklad Coal Merchant
Union of India & Ors.
D.A. Desai
O. Chinnappa Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
