New Delhi [India], March 5 : The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined an application related to the non-issuance of refunds to individuals who were unable to board their train due to a stampede at the New Delhi railway station. Instead, the court advised the impleaders to seek the appropriate legal remedies available to them.
The application was filed by individuals who were prevented from boarding the train on the day of the incident and did not receive ticket reimbursements.
Justices Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Tushar Rao Gedela presided over the bench, noting that the issues raised were of a private nature and various remedies were available for such matters. They further emphasized that the purpose of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is to enforce specific provisions, and any grievances against the railway authority constitute a personal cause of action.
After some arguments, the counsel representing the impleaders withdrew the application and sought permission to pursue the appropriate legal remedies for their grievance. The court granted this request, stating, "The application is disposed of with the liberty as prayed for."
The Delhi High Court on February 19 sought a response from the Railways regarding a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) over the stampede at New Delhi Railway Station during peak hours, which resulted in the loss of 18 lives.
The PIL alleged that the stampede on Platform No. 16 was caused by overcrowding due to multiple long-distance trains arriving and departing simultaneously on the Delhi-Prayagraj route during the Mahakumbh. It claims that the tragedy resulted from administrative negligence and violated the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed that the Railway Board undertake this examination and subsequently file a short affidavit detailing the steps to be taken. The next date of hearing is March 26.
The court noted that this public interest petition raises concerns about the ineffective implementation of provisions in the Railways Act, primarily Sections 57 and 147.
Section 57 specifies that every railway station must limit the number of passengers who can travel in a compartment. These are penal provisions. The petition emphasizes the critical need for enforcing these sections.
The Solicitor General, representing the Railways, stated that the Administration is not treating this as adversarial litigation, and the Railways Board will examine the concerns raised at the highest level.
The plea moved by Arth Vidhi, a group of Lawyers and entrepreneurs, through Advocates Aditya Trivedi and Shubhi Pastor, argued that the Railways violated their own legislative duties as outlined in Sections 57 and 147 of the Railways Act, 1989. Section 57 mandates that every railway administration must fix the maximum number of passengers allowed in each compartment of every type of carriage. Section 147 requires platform tickets for entry into railway stations when a person does not have a valid reservation.
The petition emphasized that these rules should have been strictly enforced due to the ongoing Mahakumbh in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. It also highlighted that these rules are not enforced even under normal circumstances, leading to crowded trains and platforms.