IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW BENCH, LUCKNOW .
FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 134 OF 1998 (Bench)
(u/s 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act)
Union of India THROUGH The General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi (Defendant)
APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. Smt. Asha Bajpai aged about 44 years widow of late Krishna Kishore
Bajpai.
2. Ashish Bajpai aged about 19 years son of late Krishna Kishore Bajpai.
3. Kumari Ankita Bajpai aged about 16 years daughter of late Krishna Kishore Bajpai.
Minor under the guardianship of her next friend and real mother Smt. Asha Bajpai. All the respondents are resident of 134/361, Bashiratganj, P.S. Naka Hindola, Lucknow .
RESPONDENTS
4. The State of U.P. through Secretary (Home), Secretariat, Lucknow , UP.
First Appeal From Order against the award dated 24.11.1997 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in case no.O.A.9700006 who awarded the compensation to the respondents to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-
NATURE OF THE CLAIM:
Compensation u/s 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act.
Reserved
First Appeal From Order No.134 of 1998
Union of India ………………………….Appellant
Versus
Smt. Asha Bajpai………………………..Respondent
Alongwith
F.A.F.O.Nos.363 of 2002 and 100 of 2003
Hon. S.N. Srivastava, J.
Hon. S.S. Chauhan, J.
Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 3.5.2007, Railways as well as State of U.P. reeled out certain details on the basis of which this Court by a detailed order dated 23.5.2007 enjoined the Railways, the Department of Home, the State of U.P. and other concerned authorities in the Government Railway Police and the Railway Board to convene a meeting and initiate deliberations over the rising trend of incidents/accidents and converge to a consensus over preventive measures and take a policy decision with a view to improving the working of the Government Railway Police and Railway Protection Force in order to ensure safety and security of person and property of passengers by 15th July, 2007 attended with direction to take policy decision as regards joint responsibility of the officers of Railway, G.R.P and R.P.F. followed by direction to consider the viability of manning each and every reserved and unreserved compartments in such a manner that duty conductors/T.T.E./Police Escort do not leave the compartment unattended and must be made to exercise strict vigil particularly at the place of scheduled halt. In the light of the above directions, it it has been informed that meeting was convened on 17.7.2007 attended by various authorities and the quintessence of the decision taken therein was that it would necessitate increase in the strength of police personnel and allocation of more funds for the purpose. The relevant details enumerated at page 7 of the order dated 1.8.2007 are excerpted below.
"With regard to viability of manning each reserved and unreserved compartments by TTE/GRP Staff, special secretary informed that with the present sanctioned strength of GRP manning of each reserved and unreserved compartments is not practically feasible. Assistance from Railways will be required to increase the strength of GRP since Railway has to bear the 50% of the expenditure on GRP.
ADG/RPF mentioned that at present more than 1400 mail/express/passenger trains are being escorted by the RPF and more than 2200 such trains are being escorted by GRP daily on an average. Manning such unreserved and reserved coaches of all trains will require additional resources and man-power of a very high order and economic viability of the proposal which may be uncertain taking into account the large number of trains (more than 15000) operated over Indian Railways.
EDPM/Railway Board in regard to manning of each reserved and unreserved coaches mentioned that Railway has no policy in vogue to man unreserved compartments by TTEs. At present there are approximately 5000 number of trains, having approximately 16000 reserved coaches and 11000 unreserved coaches. The present sanctioned strength of approximately 300000 TTEs is not sufficient to even man all reserved coaches. The Railways are further increasing the unreserved coaches in the train and it is not at all viable to man all the coaches by the TTEs.
However, it was agreed that more TTEs/GRP/RPF can be detailed selectively in vulnerable areas/sections/trains, instead of manning each and every reserved and unreserved compartment of all the trains. Instructions may be issued to GRP/RPF escorts to focus on unreserved coaches at originating stations during half at all possible stations en route. Special Squads comprising lady ticket checking staff and lady constables are already being deployed for conducting surprise checks in the ladies compartments to prevent crime against women passengers."
By means of the self same order, this Court enjoined the Railways to pinpoint the responsibility of the Railways in so far as passengers to whom wait listed tickets are issued while charging amount equal to those who are issued ticket against available berths as well as charges to be made to maintain law and order, public order, registration of crime (method and competence), investigation, safety and security of Railway Stations, trains and other connected places. The matter was heard again and after elaborate hearing judgment was reserved on 10th August 2007. During pendency of the case, the Railways made available detailed information and documents. Apart from information and documents supplied by the Railways, it is also pleaded by learned counsel appearing for Railways that in so far as financial and fiscal performance in juxtaposition with passenger earnings are concerned, the same are indicated in enclosure I to the documents brought on record according to which passenger earning in the year 2005-06 was Rs.15,126.00 crores, Rs. 16,800 crores in the year 2006-07 and Rs. 17,400.00 crores in the year 2006-07. The earnings from goods are indicated to be Rs. 36,286.97 in the year 2005-06, Rs. 40,320.00 in the year 2006-07 and Rs.42,299.00 in the year 2006-07. It is also indicated that in the current Railway Budget, instead of enhancing the fare, the price has been reduced by Re.1/- on each ticket benefiting million of Railway commuters every day. The figure further shows that reduction of price of ticket in average comes to about 16% in cases of passengers of short distance, local trains and E.M.U train travelers. It is also indicated that on account of this, the Indian Railways is in deficit in running and maintaining passenger trains. It is also indicated that the Railway is expending on social service obligation as well, the precise details of which are that certain essential commodities of mass consumption like sugarcane, paper, livestock etc. are being transported at subsidized rate below the cost of operation in order to contain their market prices. The total loss being suffered by the Railways on the movement of these commodities is indicated to the tune of Rs.6566.13 crores. According to further details, the Railway is contributing a lot and rendering a yeoman service for social obligations and for development of infrastructure in various fields. Under the heading "A few salient outcome of Rail Operations", it has been disclosed that in the year 2007, 38(24) new trains have been introduced; total 140 trains have been made super-fast, frequency of 106 trains has been increased; 360 trains have been speeded up. It is further revealed that in the year 2005, 360 trains have been speeded up and 26 trains have been made super fast. It is further indicated that the Ministry of Railways has strived to reduce losses in coaching services without resorting to any increase in burden on passengers by way of increase in fares. This has been, it is indicated, partly achieved through improved operation and maintenance practices which augment capacity in terms of berths available without resorting to additional expenditure on new coaches and the result is that the Railway has been able to save nearly 380 coaches and 20 maintenance slots by amalgamation of rakes and further 120 locomotives have been saved and released for freight traffic/additional services. Modernization of stations has also been done at some of the station the details of which are contained in the counter affidavit. It is also mentioned that easier ticketing has also been introduced to facilitate purchase of tickets by passengers from convenient and numerous locations without their needing to go to the Railway counter. It is also indicated that the Railways has undertaken measures like e-ticketing. To augment cleanliness in coaches, operation 'clean train station' has been introduced at Ratlam station and thereafter, the facilities have been extended to 25 more stations. In so far as catering facility is concerned, it is indicated that 14 food plazas have already been allotted and 12 more such food plazas are under finalisation. Further a total 366 sites have been allotted for water vending machines, 27 milk stalls have been commissioned and sites for 249 stalls have been allotted since last 3 months to various cooperative milk federations. In order to augment tourism, it is indicated that Bharat Darshan, a tourist train for the common people has been introduced consisting of ordinary sleeper class coaches running on a pre-determined schedule and taking the tourists to important places of religious and historical importance at affordable costs. Attention has also been drawn to letter dated 8.7.2002 in which are contained the rules and procedure for unreserved ticketing system. Circular no.52 of 2006 has also been brought to the notice of the Court containing details of liberalization of refund rules contained under Rule 213 of IRCA Coaching Tariff vide Enclosure no.6. The details of cancellation in different classes i.e. from A.C. I to sleeper class are contained in Enclosure 8 to the circular. The procedure for advance reservation is also prescribed in the self same enclosure. Enclosure no.11 unfolds details about safety measures. It is claimed therein that various safety measures have been introduced as a result of which there is steep fall in the figures of train accidents. The figures disclosed are 473 in 2000-01, 415 in 2001-02, 351 in 2002-03 and 325 in 2003-04 and further to 234 in 2005-06. The year-wise details are contained in the chart to Enclosure no.11 that while protecting Railway property and passengers in the year 2005-06, Railway Protection Force personnel faced armed encounters with criminals on 13 occasions in which 5 criminals were gunned down. It is further revealed that during these operations, 6 R.P.F. personnel were lost their lives while 8 personnel were injured.
From a perusal of enclosure 11, it would transpire that the last committee, namely, Railway Safety Review Committee was constituted in 1997 under the Chairmanship of Justice H.C. Khanna which had enlisted in the report various recommendations including a recommendation asking the Central Government for giving a one time grant of Rs. 15000 crores to the Railways to enable it to clear its arrears of replacement and renewals in a fixed time schedule.
The State of U.P. has also filed affidavit sworn by Rajendra Prasad Mishra posted as Special Secretary (Home) Government of U.P. Civil Secretariat Lucknow in which it is enumerated that police including Railway Police is a State subject under Entry no.2 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India, 1950 and further that the Railway Police was Established as one District by the Government of India on 6.3.1912 and further that it was recognised as the police force for the purposes of the Code of Criminal Procedures, 1898. It is also enumerated that the duties of the Government Railway Police as regards the areas in their jurisdiction correspond general to those of the District Police in the areas under their charge. Reference has been made to paragraph 3 of the Government Railway Police Manual in which duties of the G.R.P. are envisaged as under:
"(1) to maintain order at railway stations and in trains. The term "Order" duties comprises-
(a) control of passenger traffic within station premises, specially on platforms, in booking offices, waiting halls, at entrance and exit gates and wherever specifically required in emergencies by the station officials
(b) control of vehicle and other traffic in station precincts
(c) maintenance of order in passenger trains halted at stations and prevention of over crowding encourages
(d) supervision of loaded passenger trains standing in stations
(e) arrest of persons guilty of committing nuisance, removal of persons suffering from infectious diseases and keeping of station premises clear of beggars
(f) examination of empty carriages on arrival at terminal stations for property left behind by passengers and inspect of carriages with a view to see that fittings have not been tampered withdrawals(g) removal of bodies of persons who dies in trains or on station premises and conveyance to hospital of sick passengers.
(g) removal of bodies of persons who dies in trains or on station premises and conveyance to hospital of sick passengers.
(ii) to report to the proper authorities, railway or civil, the commission of offences under the Railway Act and cases of fraud or oppression on the part of Railway personnel.
(iii) to enquire into accidents on railways ………….
(iv) to render assistance to railway officers and to other travelling public in so far as the rendering of such assistance is compatible with their own duties as police officer."
According to the assertions in the affidavit filed on behalf of the State Government, the G.R.P. is responsible generally for the prevention and detection of crimes happening within the area of Railway station while the protection of goods-sheds, goods-wagons at stations and parcel offices is not the duty of Railway Police but of Railway Security Force of the Railways. In para 28 of the affidavit, it is stated that the Government Railway Police has been performing its duties in the past and it shall perform its duties which are assigned to it to the utmost satisfaction. It is further stated that steps have been taken to pinpoint reasons for causes of lapses and the steps are being taken to further improve the working of the Government Railway Police. In para 35 of the affidavit, it is stated that the question mooted that the security of the premises outside the Railway Stations, Railway Stations and of trains whether standing at the station or the moving trains, be assigned to the Central Industrial Security Force is not constitutionally viable as per the law existing today. In the affidavit, few suggestions have been made for improvement of the security of passengers in moving trains as also at the Railway Station. The suggestions are quoted below.
(i) Each and every train whether passenger/express/mail etc. should be equipped with a mechanism by which at one central place in the train itself it can be known that from which coaches of the train distress call has come.
(ii) In each and every train a specified place may be allocated for central monitoring/receiving distress calls from any coach of the train.
(iii) The person monitoring the central place and the persons on duty in the entire train be connected to each other by wireless system.
(iv) The general coaches be inter connected to each other also.
(v) The security staff be posted both in the general coaches as well as in the reserved coaches depending upon the availability of the staff, and visualizing the crime vulnerable area through which the train passes.
(vi) Every train should display information at prominent place that where the central monitoring is available in that particular train.
(vii) The luggage safety chains as is provided in the reserved coaches should also be provided in the general coaches."
Learned counsel for private respondents urged that all passengers are entitled to get safety and security immediately after purchase of tickets by individual passengers and after he boards a train. It is further submitted that in 1997 a Committee under the Chairmanship of Justice H.C. Khanna was constituted to evolve ways and means for safety and security of the passengers. Ever-since the submission of report of Committee, about 10 years have rolled by and during this period, the crime scenario has registered an upward trend in as much as the incidence of poisoning, looting, dacoit, rape, molestations have registered a noticeable increase as already discussed in the earlier order.
In the above conspectus, it is clear that there is dual system of security which leaves much to be desired. It brooks no dispute that Government Railway Police is an entity not under the control of Railways and it functions as a separate entity sans any accountability to Railway Authorities although fact remains that this force functions within the premises of Railways on the assumption that law and order is the State subject and they are well equipped to deal with the law and order under the existing system. Instead of operating within their respective jurisdiction with separate responsibility, the working often at cross purposes has already occasioned great and irreparable damages to the safety and security of passengers and their property as is borne out from various reports. This is also clear that in spite of all such measures taken by the Railways there is no marked and noticeable improvement the concomitant result is that miseries of passengers have been increasing with each passing day. The various reports and other materials on record also make it clear that the Government Railway Police shooes away aggrieved passengers or avoid registering crime in so far as grievance and safety and securities of travelling public in train are concerned ostensibly with the avowed object of bringing down crime graph.
In view of above discussion, this Court is of the view that security and safety of passengers and their property should be placed under one command and should not be diversified into the hands of various authorities/forces in so far as registration of crime, investigation and all other connected matters are concerned. In this connection, the Court is further of the view that the entire hierarchy of Government Railway Police should be placed under the control of Railway authorities on deputation which ought to be accountable to Railway Board and other higher authorities instead of acting as a separate entity sans any accountability to Railway. It is desirable that officers and officials in the hierarchy of G.R.P. should be seconded to Railways on deputation with a fixed term and should be recalled after serving a fixed tenure with stipulation of interchangeability and inter-transferability from Civil Police to G.R.P and from G.R.P. back to Civil Police. Their stay in G.R.P should be based on performance evaluated by civil authorities of the Railways and those whose performance detracts from the desirable standard must be recalled by the State Government. The concern of the Court is that security and safety and control of crime must be devolved to able hands which may work under one authority. The R.P.F. already functions as a force which is accountable to Railways and there is no reason that the G.R.P should be allowed to function as a separate entity without any shield of accountability/responsibility.
It has also been brought to the notice of the Court that the Railway is already charging a certain amount in the ticket on the count of security of passengers. It has also been brought to the notice of the Court that Railway is issuing two million tickets for five million passengers each day for travel in unreserved compartments fetching an earning of Rs.14 crores per day upto 31.11.2006 (See Appendix to enclosure 3).
It has come in the report scripted by the Railways that steps are in active process to provide water facilities to the passengers. It has further been brought to the notice of the Court that most of the taps at the Railway station are dry and passengers often are inconvenienced and run helter and skelter for water. One or two machines at a particularly Railway station for supplying water through Eureka or any other machine is insufficient and during summer season, the only way to save life of a person and for saving the passengers from dryness is to purchase water displayed for sale on stations. In case Railway is going to take steps for supply water as mentioned in the information and documents supplied by Railways to the Court, it is desirable that the Railways should first take all effective steps to supply potable and pure water through the taps at the Railway station which is a fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
So far as deployment of Central forces is concerned, it has been informed that Railways has taken steps at certain Railway Stations including Delhi and Jammu . The State of U.P. has claimed that the law and order is the State subject and it is within the domain of the State Government to maintain law and order. This contention does not commend to us for acceptance considering that the Railway establishment is the establishment of the Central Government like the aerodrome and safety and security of the Central Government Establishment should be the concern of the Central Government. Though primary duty of the law and order is that of the State Government but the Central Government or the Railway could take effective steps for protecting passengers at the Railway Station without impinging upon the power of the State Government of maintaining law and order. For instance it may be recalled that in any emergent situation, the State Government has often called in assistance of Central Forces for safety and security of the citizens under the Constitutional power and therefore, the argument of the State Government that the law and order is the subject of the State and therefore Central forces could not be deployed for beefing security and safety cannot be lapped up. The Court is of the view that the matter requires thorough scrutiny and discussion which can be gone into by appointing a Commission by the appellant (Railways) which it is desirable should be headed by a sitting or retired judge of the High Court or of the Apex Court as the case may be. From the date of constituting a commission, it should be required to submit report within a period not exceeding three months.
The case shall next be listed after expiry of three months.
M.H.
August 24, 20076.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment