Karnataka High Court Rejects PIL To Disband Tatkal, Emergency Quota Schemes For Rail Tickets

The Karnataka High Court on Friday (February 13) dismissed a PIL seeking to disband tatkal and emergency quota schemes for railway tickets, stated to be implemented without legislative backing.

When the matter was called, a division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Poonacha dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.

The PIL prayed for disbanding existing Tatkal and Emergency Quota schemes implemented through executive orders without any legislative backing. In lieu of these schemes the petition sought direction to the Union of India to table schemes before the Parliament in accordance with Section 60 and 199 of Railways Act in order to ensure proper legislative compliance.

Section 60 states that the Central Government can make rules for the convenience and accommodation (including the reservation of seats or berths in trains) to passengers; the amount of refund for the cancellation of a ticket; the circumstances under which change of names of passengers, having reserved seats or berths, may be permitted; the carriage of luggage and the conditions subject to which luggage may be kept in the cloak rooms at the stations; diseases which are infectious or contagious; the conditions subject to which a railway administration may carry passengers suffering from infectious or contagious diseases and the manner in which carriages used by such passengers may be disinfected etc.

Section 199 mandates that every rule made under the Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions. If before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be.

However, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that rule.

The plea further sought an amendment to the Railways Passengers (Cancellation and Refund of Fare) Rules 2015 to ensure compliance with Section 51 (2) of Railways Act in terms of:

• granting full refunds for Waitlisted and Reservation Against Cancellation (RAC) tickets when accommodation is not provided
• refunding the fare difference for RAC passengers who are not provided sleeping accommodation
• removing arbitrary time restrictions on applying for cancellation and refunds
• removing limitation of 4 hours or preparation of chart for refund eligibility in the rules to legal adherence

Case title: GOWRISHANKAR S v/s THE UNION OF INDIA

WP 3787/2026