Railway Stops Not To Be Provided On Personal Demands Or Vested Interests For High Speed Express Trains Like 'Vande Bharat': Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Friday dismissed a plea by a lawyer seeking a direction to be issued to the Southern Railways for permitting a stop for the 'Vande Bharat Train Service' at Tirur Railway Station at Malappuram District. 

It was alleged by the petitioner that despite Malappuram being a densely populated area, with a large number of people depending on train services for travel, a stop had not been allotted for the district. It was also averred that an earlier proposal to allot a stop at Tirur did not fructify, without any specific reason. 

Dismissing the plea which alleged that the failure to allot a stop at Tirur Railway Station was an injustice to the people of Malappuram District, the Division Bench comprising Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas and Justice C. Jayachandran observed that there was no public interest espoused in the present writ petition

The Court observed that stops to be provided for a train is a matter that has to be determined by the Railways, and that no person has a vested right to demand that a particular train ought to stop at a particular station.

"Moreover, like the petitioner, if every individual or public spirited person in every district, starts clamouring or demanding a stop to be provided at a Railway Station of his/her choice, the purpose of setting up high speed trains would itself be lost. Railway stops are not to be provided on demands based on personal or vested interests especially for high speed express trains like Vande Bharat train. If stops are provided on demand by public, the term express train will itself become a misnomer," it was observed. 

Further, the Court added that providing stops for railway trains was a matter purely within the discretion and jurisdiction of the railways in which it could not interfere. 

"Providing railway stop for the Vande Bharat train at Tirur, Malappuram is therefore not justiciable," the Court observed while dismissing the plea in limine. 

The petitioner was represented by Advocates A. Abdul Rahman, P. Martin Jose, Sumeen S., Sreelakshmi C.H., Anju Sreedhar, and Davis Pius. 

Case Title: P.T. Sheejish v. Union of India & Ors. 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 210 

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment