The Indian Railway Rates Tribunal was established under the Indian Railways Act, 1989. It consists of a Chairman who is, or has been, a judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court and two members one of whom, in the opinion of the Central government, has "Special Knowledge of commercial industrial or economic conditions of the country" and the other a person who, in the opinion of the Central government, "has special knowledge and experience of the commercial working of the railways." These persons are appointed by the Central government and hold office for such period as may be specified in the order of appointment, but for not more than five years.
The Tribunal has the power to hear complaints against the railway administration relating to discriminatory or unreasonable rates levied by it, or levying any other charge which is unreasonable or in giving undue preference to a particular person. The Tribunal can also hear references made by the Central government in regard to classification of any commodity, fixation of wharfage and demurrage charges, fixation of fares levied for the carriage of luggages, parcels, heavy materials and military traffic, and fixation of lump-sum rates. The Tribunal acts with the aid of assessors who are selected from a panel prepared by the Central government. This panel includes representatives of trade, industry, agriculture and persons who have a working knowledge of the railways. They are selected after consultation with the interests likely to be affected by the decisions of the Tribunal.
A party before the Tribunal is entitled to be heard in person or through an authorised agent including a lawyer. The decision of the Tribunal is made by the majority, and is final; it can be executed by a civil court "as if it were a decree." The Tribunal can revise its order on an application being made by the railway administration after one year of its order and only if it is satisfied that "since the date of decision by the Tribunal, there has been a material change in the circumstances."
No suit can be instituted or proceeding taken in respect of any of the matters which the Tribunal is empowered to deal with or decide.
Since the Tribunal is presided over by a judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court, independence and impartiality is assured. This is the most valuable safeguard as the Tribunal has to decide disputes between an individual and the administration.
The appeal against the order of the Tribunal lies to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
The Tribunal has the power to hear complaints against the railway administration relating to discriminatory or unreasonable rates levied by it, or levying any other charge which is unreasonable or in giving undue preference to a particular person. The Tribunal can also hear references made by the Central government in regard to classification of any commodity, fixation of wharfage and demurrage charges, fixation of fares levied for the carriage of luggages, parcels, heavy materials and military traffic, and fixation of lump-sum rates. The Tribunal acts with the aid of assessors who are selected from a panel prepared by the Central government. This panel includes representatives of trade, industry, agriculture and persons who have a working knowledge of the railways. They are selected after consultation with the interests likely to be affected by the decisions of the Tribunal.
A party before the Tribunal is entitled to be heard in person or through an authorised agent including a lawyer. The decision of the Tribunal is made by the majority, and is final; it can be executed by a civil court "as if it were a decree." The Tribunal can revise its order on an application being made by the railway administration after one year of its order and only if it is satisfied that "since the date of decision by the Tribunal, there has been a material change in the circumstances."
No suit can be instituted or proceeding taken in respect of any of the matters which the Tribunal is empowered to deal with or decide.
Since the Tribunal is presided over by a judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court, independence and impartiality is assured. This is the most valuable safeguard as the Tribunal has to decide disputes between an individual and the administration.
The appeal against the order of the Tribunal lies to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
0 comments: