Madras High Court Upholds Railway Rule Restricting Sleeping Berth Timings; Says Sick Passengers Can Seek Railway Staff's Help

The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan held that the restriction was imposed to ensure the convenience of the passengers. The court added that a solitary incident where passengers declined to extend the sleeping hour for a sick person does not necessitate invalidating the provision.

“The restrictions under Para 652 bear a reasonable nexus for ensuring convenience for all traveling passengers. A solitary instance, where co-passengers declined to extend sleeping hours for the appellant's unwell wife, does not justify invalidating a rule designed to serve the broader public interest,” the court said.

The court added that in such individual instances, the passengers could take the matter up with the Railway Protection Force or other officials in the station who could ensure that the safeguards are properly enforced.

“We, however, clarify that passengers experiencing difficulties can report them to railway officials, who are bound to ensure that the safeguards under Para 652(d) are properly enforced,” the court said.

The court was hearing an appeal against an order of a single judge which had dismissed a challenge to the provision.

The appellant submitted that while he was travelling with his unwell wife, she was not permitted to use the sleeping berth beyond the prescribed hours. The appellant submitted that though he requested other passengers, the same was not heeded to and the safeguards provided under the manual were not purposeful and thus, the entire restriction has to be declared unconstitutional.

The court noted that para 652(d) of the manual was introduced to balance the convenience of all passengers. As per the manual, sleeping accommodation was limited between 10 pm and 6 am, and sitting accommodation was provided for the rest of the period for passengers in the reserved coaches. The court noted that the primary purpose of the restriction was to ensure that all valid ticket holders could travel comfortably without causing inconvenience to the co-passengers, as passengers assigned middle and upper berths require seating space during the day.

The court also added that the manual also provided safeguards to ensure comfortable travel for pregnant women and persons with disabilities. As per the manual, the passengers could request to co-operate with sick persons, persons with disabilities, and pregnant ladies in case they want to sleep beyond permissible time limits.

The court observed that despite the safeguards provided, if the appellant had any grievance, he could have taken the help of the RPF. The court noted that instead of taking assistance, the appellant prematurely chose to challenge the provision.

Noting that the challenge was baseless and misplaced, the court was not inclined to interfere with the order of the single judge. The court thus disposed of the plea.

Counsel for Appellant: Mr. L. S. M. Hasan Faizal for Mr. T. Dharani