Kerala High Court
Railway First Class Season Ticket ... vs Union Of India on 19 December, 2012
Author: Manjula Chellur
Bench: Manjula Chellur, K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/30TH MAGHA 1934
WA.No. 286 of 2013 IN WP(C).5711/2012
-----------------------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).5711/2012 DATED 19-12-2012
....................
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
-------------------------------
1. RAILWAY FIRST CLASS SEASON TICKET PASSENGERS ASSOCIATION
KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - DR.SEEMA PRADEEP
W/O.DR.PRADEEP, G.G.DENTAL CLINIC
OPPOSITE OLD BUS STAND, VATAKARA, CALICUT
PIN - 673 101, RESIDING AT THILAK, POST CHEVAYUR
CALICUT - 673 017.
2. I.ARUNJITH, S/O.GOPALAN, ITTUVEETTIL HOUSE, ATHANIKKAL,
WEST HILL P.O.,CALICUT - 673 005.
3. DR.SREELATHA, W/O.DR.RAJEEV, KUNIYEDATHU POST MARIKUNNU
CALICUT - 673 012.
4. DR.ANU AUGUSTINE, W/O.RAJEEV, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT
OF BIO-TECHNOLOGY AND MICRO BIOLOGY
KANNUR UNIVERSITY, PALAD, THALASSEY
RESIDING NO.1-E (SKYLINE), MARINE GATE,
NEAR CORPORATION OFFICE, BEACH ROAD
CALICUT - 673 032.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.ASOKAN
SRI.VINEETH KOMALACHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS/ESPONDENTS:
---------------------------------
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
RAILWAY BOARD RAIL BHAVAN NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS
OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI - 600 003.
3. THE CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY,
HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O.
CHENNAI - 600 003.
WA.No. 286 of 2013
4. THE DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY,
PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD - 678 002.
5. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION,
PALAKKAD - 678 002.
6. THE STATION MANAGER,
CALIUT RAILWAY STATION,
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CALICUT - 673 001.
BY SRI.C.S.DIAS, SC, RAILWAYS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-02-2013,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Manjula Chellur, C.J. & K. Vinod Chandran, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.A. No. 286 OF 2013
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2013
JUDGMENT
Manjula Chellur, C.J.
This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge rejecting the claim of the writ petitioners. The appellants/writ petitioners, admittedly, were using First Class Season Ticket for more than 20 years for their travel. According to them, by Ext.P1, their right to use First Class Season Ticket is stayed and they sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to continue issuance of First Class Super Fast Tickets to the appellants as provided under Exts.P16 and P17. Ext.P1, admittedly, is a refusal to issue First Class Season Tickets for Super Fast Trains in a particular sector.
2. According to the appellants, there cannot be such a restriction to issue First Class Season Tickets in any sector as such benefit was extended to the passengers for quite some time and stoppage of such benefit would put the WA No. 286 of 2013 -:2:- writ petitioners and similarly placed persons to immense hardship and inconvenience. There cannot be any doubt so far as the fact that a policy decision depending upon the financial constraints, the Railways are required to decide how restriction can be imposed. The question is whether the appellants/writ petitioners have any vested right to demand for such issuance of First Class Season Tickets for Super fast trains, especially in sectors where there are unreserved coaches.
3. The learned Single Judge, after referring to the contentions raised by both the parties, especially in the light of a Division Bench judgment of this Court in W.A. No.3133 of 2001 wherein the relevant paragraph 4 was reproduced, opining, there is no justification in the claim made by the writ petitioners dismissed writ petition. We have gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge especially paragraph 4 of W.A. No.3133 of 2001, where under similar circumstances such benefits claimed by the passengers were denied and it has reached finality. Even otherwise, in the absence of any statutory right under which the appellants could claim such right, we are at loss to understand how they can seek for a writ of mandamus for a WA No. 286 of 2013 -:3:- specific direction in a matter where policy decision of the Railways is under challenge. Depending upon several factors having regard to the reserved coaches or unreserved coaches in a particular sector, a policy decision taken by the Railway Administration is under challenge before us. If any passenger trains where unreserved coaches are there, if such benefit could be availed by the appellants, they are at liberty to approach the Railways for such benefit and the same will be considered in accordance with the procedure or the Scheme or the Circular issued by the Railways from time to time.
In the light of the above discussions, we are of the opinion, none of the grounds raised in the appeal could be considered in favour of the appellants. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed.
Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice.
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.
ttb/19/02 WA No. 286 of 2013 -:4:-