- (1.) B. D. Agarwal, J. The respondent 1 is a registered partnership firm engaged in manufacture of block glass and glass bangles in Firozabad (district Agra ). The respondents 2 to 6 are partners of this firm. To run the unit the respondents need steam coal - a controlled commodity which they have to transport by rail from collieries situate in the eastern region of the country. Under the existing scheme, sponsoring is done by the Director of Industries, U. P. (respondent 10) within the specified ceiling limits. This is considered by the Director, Movement (Railways) (the petitioner) in the light of priorities allocated under the Preferential Traffic Schedule formulated by the Central Government in exercise of the powers under Section 27-A Railways Act. The Director, Movement accords sanction whereupon allotment of wagons is done from time to time, depending on the availability of coal and coal wagons.
(2.) IN October, 1977, the respondents 1 to 6 instituted Original suit No. 298 of 1977 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Agra, with the allegations, in brief, that for the year 1977 they had been sanctioned 104 wagons of coal. Out of these they received 60 wagons only between January to March, 1977. The coal thus received had been fully utilized. The production suffered due to cessation of supply of coal thereafter. On July 5, 1977, the Director of INdustries, U. P. passed an order whereby the allocation of coal wagons to these respondents was suspended. The respondents assessed their minimum requirement as nine coal wagons per month on the basis of their production programme and capacity and contended that officers of the Directorate had satisfied themselves on inspection made; the supplies were being received accordingly from 1974 onwards but of late the respondents were being unduly harassed. Due to lack of regular supply as per Scheduled Programme there were intermittent suspensions in production of commercial goods. The relief claimed by the respondents-plaintiffs in the suit was :- "that as the plaintiffs are entitled to a minimum of 9 wagons of steam coal per month to be supplied to them per month, the defendants, their agents and servants be restrained from in any manner suspending, obstructing, interfering or withholding the supply of 9 wagons for transportation of steam coal from collieries in Eastern INdia, in favour of the plaintiffs at Firozabad. " Despite service of process there was no appearance put in for the petitioner or the respondents 7 to 11 arrayed as defendants in the suit. The trial court considered the affidavit of the respondent 2 (a partner in the plaintiff-firm) and other documents and decreed the suit ex parte on 18th May 1979. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows : - "the suit is decreed. It is hereby declared that the plaintiffs are entitled to a minimum of nine wagons of steam coal per month to be supplied to them per month subject to the plaintiffs' running their factory and satisfying the defendants that they are properly utilising the steam coal supplied to them unless and until their S. S. I. registration and coal quota are cancelled in accordance with law. The defendants are restrained from obstructing or withholding the supply of the aforesaid nine wagons of steam coal per month from collieries in Eastern India in favour of the plaintiffs at Firozabad till the plaintiffs hold a valid S. S. I. registration and utilize the steam coal supplied in their factory according to the terms and conditions of the S. S. I. Registration and coal quota. " In order to secure compliance to the terms of the decree the respondents 1 to 6 made various approaches to the petitioner both in writing and personally followed by notice dt. 28-1-1981. At long last, the decree-holders put the decree into execution under O. XXI, R. 32 Civil P. C. registered as Execution Case No. 9 of 1981. At their instance warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner on Nov. 20, 1981; the property in the office of the Director of Industries, U. P. was attached. Not content with this the decree-holders on May 29, 1982, also applied for the attachment of the 'toofan Express' train at Firozabad - a fantastic prayer indeed. The petitioner filed objection under S. 47 Civil P. C. registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 64 of 1981 whereupon the warrant of arrest was withdrawn.
(3.) ON Dec. 23, 1982, the petitioner approached this Court under Art. 226/227 of the Constitution against the judgment of the trial court dt. 18th May, 1979. The petition was admitted by a learned single Judge; the arrest of the petitioner and attachment of railway property in execution of the decree were stayed. The writ petition is resisted by the respondents-plaintiffs. Before adverting to rival contentions of the parties in this petition a reference may be made in some further details to the statutory scheme concerning the transport of coal. Section 27 (1) of the Railways Act enjoins on the railway administration to arrange for receiving and forwarding traffic without unreasonable delay and without difficulty. Section 27-A confers power on the Central Government to give directions in regard to transport of goods by railway administration. In so far as material it provides :- "27a. Power of Central Government to give directions in regard to transport of goods by Railway Administration :- (1) The Central Government may, if in its opinion it is necessary in the public interest so to do, by general or special order, direct any railway administration :- (a) to give special facilities for, or preference to, the 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; xxxxxx (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, every railway administration shall be bound to comply with any direction given under sub-sec. (1), and any action taken by a railway administration in pursuance of any such direction shall not be deemed to be a contravention of S. 28. ";