SCHEDULE

Case No.TAMP/40/2000-Mlac.

The Mumbal Port Trust (MBPT)

...

Applicant

<Z> R P E Ft

(Passed on this 5th day of January 2001)

This Authority had passed an Order on 10 November 1999 relating to 'heavy lift

charges' for common adoption by all the Major Port Trusts.

Considering a representation submitted by the MANSA, this Authority modified the

above order vide its Order dated 26 September 2000 in respect of MBPT, the operative portion of

which reads as follows:

"(i).

This Authority's Order dated 10 November 99 is modified in its application at the

MBPT to the extent that the existing provision about levy of a 10% (notional)

cranage charges, In cases of non-use of the port's equipment, will remain in force in

place of the 50% charge prescribed by the impugned order.

(ii).

The MBPT shall not levy the 10% (notional) cranage oharge in cases of heavy lifts

by cranes and gears which do not belong to the port, if the port's heavy lift cranes

could not be spared for reasons like maintenance, overhaul, repairs, non availability

of the crane because of being hired by another party, etc. and; consequently when

the heavy lifts have to be landed or shipped necessarily by the use of the ship's own

derricks or hired private cranes."

The MBPT has now submitted a representation requesting to amend the Order

dated 26 September 2000, for the following reasons:

(i).

The statement recorded in Para 5(i) and 6 (ii) of the Order dated 26 September

2000 that during the joint hearing, the MBPT indicated that it did not have the

concept of heavy lift charges and requested for exemption from the Order is not

correct What was stated was that there was no concept of heavy lift charges for

export cargo Be that as it may, the request of the MBPT, as stated now, has been

noted.

(ii).

In its letter dated 15 September 2000, the MBPT has explicitly stated that the levy

of charges for not using Port Trust crane for handling of heavy lifts be retained at

the present level of 10%; but only in case of import cargo and not export cargo for

which there will be no separate charges.

(iii).

In the Authority's Order levy of charges for non-use of Port Trust cranes for

handling heavy lift cargo is meant both for import and export operations. The

extension of these provisions to export cargo will affect exports through the Port as

it will lead to increase in handling cost making exports more expensive and

incompetitive and also be counter productive of Port's efforts to boost exports

through the Port by granting additional incentives.

The MBPT has, therefore, requested us to review the order and issue amendment

to exclude export cargo from the levy of heavy lift charges.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY

[PART III—SFC 4J

Baswd on the records available, and based on a collective application of mind, the

following position emerges:

(1)

The records of arguments made dunng the joint hearing held on 15 September

2000 show that the representative of MBPT mentioned that th« Port did not have

the concept of 'heavy Jiff The Port may have Intended to make tf-'.s statement only

<r> reaped of export cargo cases, but, such a specific suhrwssu \ was not made

The paragraphs 5(i) and 6(il) of this Authority's Order dated 26 September 2000,

therefore, reflect the correct position of the joint hearing proceedings

(u)

It is true that the MBPT in its letter dated 15 September 2000 (received by this

Authority after the joint heanng) has mentioned about retaining the (notional)

cranage charge of 10% only In case of Import cargo This point has, however, been

inadvertently missed

(in)

The Scale of Rates of the MBPT, before it was amended by this Authority's Order

dated 10 November 99, prescribed a 10% (notional) cranage charge for use of

private equipment for landing of heavy lifts

This Authority's Order dated 26 September 2000 under paragraph 7(i) approves

modification of its earlier Order dated 10 November 99 in its a* Plication at the

MBPT to the extent that the existing provision about levy of 10% (notional) cranage

charge, In cases of non-use of the port's equipment, will remain in force

With the above modification ordered by this Authority, the position in the Scale of

Rates of the MBPT before its amendment by Order dated 10 November 99 reverts,

and, the position was of charging 10% (notional) cranage charges only in respect of

Import cargo That being so, no further amendment of the Authority's Order to

exclude export cargo from the levy of (notional) cranage charges is necessary

(N)

Possibly, the confusion may have ansen due to trie wording of thj? Ust sentence of

paragraph 7(ii) of the Order dated 26 Septembei 2000 which reads i s follows*

consequently, when the heavy lifts have to be landed or

shipped necessarily by the ship's own derncks or hired

private cranes"

Paragraph 7(11) stipulates the circumstances under which heavy lift (notional) charge

shal! not be ievied It can not be seen to mean that such charges am to bo levied in

all circumstances not mentioned under para 7(ii), with a total disregard to a specific

stipulation about levy of such a charge is made under para 7(i) of the Order

(v)

Eventhoiigh there Is no factual error or unintended stipulation made In the order

dated 26 September 2000, the wording in paragraph 7 is elaborated further to avoid

any confusion in the application of the Order

In the result, and for the reasons given above, and based on a collective application

of mind, the Authority approves substitution of paragraph 7 of its Order dated 20 September 2000 by

the following

In the result, and for the reasons given above, this Authority vacates the interim stay

granted in this case earlier and decides as follows

(i)

This Authority's Order dated 10 November 99 is modified in its application

at the MBPT to the extent that the existing provision about levy of a 10%

(notional) cranage charge, in cases of ncn-use of the ports equipment for

landing of heavy lifts, will remain in force in place of the 50% charge

prescribed by the impugned order.

(ii).

Trie MBPT shall not levy the 10% (notional) cranage charge in cases of

heavy lifts by cranes and gears which do not belong to the port, if the port's

heavy lift cranes can not be spared for reasons like maintenance, overhaul,

repairs, non availability of the crane because of being hired by another

party, etc.; and, consequently, waan the heavy lifts have to be landed

necessarily by the use of the ship's own derricks or hired private cranes."

S SATHYAM, Chairman

[Advt No. III/IV/143/Exty./2000]

Printed by the Manager, Govt. of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, Now Delhi-110064

Mid Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-ll 0054