SHARDA SHUKLA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , who is a resident of Village Mand Tehsil -Raghuraj Nagar, District -Satna has filed this writ petition in public interest and the grievance of the petitioner is that there was an unmanned railway crossing across a public route situated in Village -Mand. This railway crossing connects near about dozens of villages and is the only route available for connecting these villages with National Highway No. 75, which is about 4 km away from the railway crossing. It is said that the villages and agriculturists in the area are using the said railway crossing for transportation of various agricultural produce. It is said that except this route, there is no alternate route for use of the villagers.

(2.) GRIEVANCE of the petitioner is that the respondent/Railway Administration has now abolished the railway crossing and in place thereof, have constructed an under -bridge. However, it is said that the under -bridge is very small and agricultural equipments including tractors with loaded trolleys and other vehicles cannot pass through the same. Accordingly seeking a mandamus to the respondents not to abolish unmanned railway crossing and to further provide better and sufficient option for movement of vehicles, this writ petition is filed. Respondents have filed the detailed reply and point out that as far as abolishing of the unmanned railway crossing is concerned, the prayer cannot be allowed as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in an order passed in W.P. No. 162/2001 has specifically directed for elimination of all level crossing by following one of the following methods during the five years period 2010 -15. As per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is said by the respondents in the return that the level crossing has to be replaced in the following manner:

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the respondents contend that the first prayer of the petitioner not to remove the unmanned railway crossing cannot be granted. It is pointed out that after the orders were passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the guidelines and instructions have been issued by the Railway Board vide Annexure -R1 and R2. One of the alternate option as per these guidelines was to construct a railway under -bridge on the level crossing wherever possible. It is said that after due survey and after approval of the competent authority including No Objection from the Collector, for the level crossing in question, a railway under -bridge has to be constructed, it has become operational and in Paragraph -5 of the return, the respondents make various assertions and deny the contention of the petitioner that the specification and design of the railway under -bridge does not permit movements of vehicles like agricultural equipments, trolleys etc. In the return filed, the respondents say that the normal height Trucks/Mini Trucks, Mini Buses, Tractor Trolleys, 108 Ambulance and Cars can very conveniently pass through the under -bridge constructed. For the sake of convenience, the assertions made in Paragraph -5 reads as under: