Port cargo storage limit upheld as valid exercise of regulatory power, with penalty rent for unauthorised occupation.

The circular fixing a sixty-day limit for cargo storage at the port was valid because it operated within the notification governing storage charges and the Traffic Manager's regulatory powers. The notification and its notes required prior permission for use of storage space, authorised the Traffic Manager to regulate allotment and vacation of space, and contemplated penalty rent for unauthorised occupation. Continued occupation beyond the permitted period could therefore be treated as unauthorised until a fresh tariff regime came into force, without any amendment to the notified rates. The circular merely clarified the point at which penalty rent would apply.

---

---

Issues: Whether the circular fixing a sixty-day limit for storage of cargo at the port and treating continued storage thereafter as unauthorised occupation, with liability to penalty rent, was in conformity with the governing notification and the powers of the Traffic Manager.

Analysis: The notification fixing storage charges, read with its notes, required prior permission for use of storage space, empowered the Traffic Manager to regulate allotment and vacation of space, and contemplated penalty rent for unauthorised occupation. The regulatory scheme gave the Traffic Manager authority to manage port operations, prevent congestion, and determine when continued occupation of space would cease to be authorised until a fresh tariff regime came into force. The circular did not amend the notified rates; it operated within the framework of the notification by prescribing a uniform time-limit for authorised storage and clarifying when continued use would attract penalty rent.

Conclusion: The circular was valid and within the authority of the Traffic Manager.

---