Supreme Court Urges Railways To Adopt Tech Like Auto-Videography To Avoid Excess Weight Disputes

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N.K. Singh made these observations while deciding an appeal filed by the Railways against a 2017 Full Bench decision of the Gauhati High Court.

The High Court had held that a show-cause notice must be issued before imposing penalties for excess weight in cargo consignments.

The dispute arose from a demand notice of Rs. 10,61,250/- issued to Megha Technical and Engineers Pvt. Ltd. for alleged excess weight in a 2010 consignment of dry fly ash. While the Supreme Court noted that the appeal had become “virtually academic” as the penalty was already paid, it nonetheless addressed the broader legal and operational concerns raised.

Relying on the precedent in Jagjit Cotton Textile Mills v. Chief Commercial Superintendent, N.R. (1998) 5 SCC 126, the Court held that raising penal freight demands without prior notice does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. It remarked that the nature of such cases makes it impractical to issue show-cause notices or conduct mini-trials before levying penalties.

However, the Court went further to suggest systemic improvements for the future: "The appellant-Railways needs to update and upgrade themselves with the advancement of technology... a mechanism like automatic videography of the loaded weight along with the weight measurement at the time of off-loading can save the parties from easily avoidable litigation."

The Bench clarified that this suggestion was merely illustrative but expressed hope that Indian Railways had already adopted or would soon adopt scientific methods to enhance transparency and efficiency in freight operations.

Conclusively, the Court set aside the Gauhati High Court's ruling, terming it “obsolete and redundant.”

"If an aggrieved person is still dissatisfied, this Court has, in the cited decision, permitted them to approach the Railway Rates Tribunal. This alternative efficacious remedy is always available to such person," the Bench further directed.