Karnataka High Court
H C Nandish vs The Ministry Of Indian Railways on 22 February, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Ashok S.Kinagi
-1-
WP No. 16448 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO. 16448 OF 2021 (GM-RES-PIL)
BETWEEN:
1. H.C.NANDISH
S/O H.V.CHANDRASHEKAR
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT NO.6
HULLAHALLI DONIGAL
SAKALESHPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573134
2. S.V.PARAMESHWARAIAH
S/O LATE VIRIPAKASHA S.S.
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
SIDIGALALE MUGALI
Digitally signed SAKALESHPURA TALUK
by K P SWETHA HASSAN DISTRICT-573214
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SRINIVASA GOUDA K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MINISTRY OF INDIAN RAILWAYS
BY THE SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN RAILWAYS
THE GOVT. OF UNION OF INDIA
NEW DELHI-110001
-2-
WP No. 16448 of 2021
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GOVT. OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE-560001
3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
HUBLI-580020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.SHIVAKUMAR, CGC FOR R-1 & 3;
SMT.PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R-2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
G.O.DATED 17.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF
KARNATAKA VIDE ANENXURE-C AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. By way of the present public interest litigation, the
petitioners who are the residents of Sakleshpura Taluk, Hassan
District pray for quashing of GO No.IDD 95 NSW 2018,
Bengaluru dated 17.01.2019 issued by the Government of
Karnataka vide Annexure-C. They have also sought a direction
to the respondents to implement the laying of Railway line
between Belur and Sakaleshpura as per GO No.IDD 146 NSW
2013, Bengaluru dated 03.03.2014 vide Annexure-D. As the
Government Order dated 17.01.2019 vide Annexure-C is called
WP No. 16448 of 2021
in question in this petition, we are referring to the said
Government Order.
2. A perusal of the Government Order dated 17.01.2019 shows
that on a comparative study, the State Government was of the
opinion that the cost of the proposed project namely, Belur-
Sakaleshpura Railway Line had exceeded enormously and it
would not be feasible to continue with the said project and as
such, Belur-Sakaleshpura Railway line stretch was dropped.
3. Statement of objections has been filed on behalf of
respondent No.2 -Principal Secretary, Infrastructure
Development Department, Government of Karnataka. It would
be necessary to refer to certain factual aspects stated in the
statement of objections at paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7.
4. In paragraph 4, an objection is raised that the writ petition
is liable to be dismissed for non-compliance of the PIL Rules. It
is also stated that the petitioners have not disclosed their
antecedents and they have no expertise about the subject-
matter.
WP No. 16448 of 2021
5. The statements made in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 are more
important which read thus:
"5. It is humbly submitted that the State
Government has accorded administrative
approval for laying of the new Railway line
between Chikkamagalur-Belur-Sakaleshpura
(47 kms) at an estimated cost of Rs.657.80
crores on 50:50 cost sharing basis between
Government of Karnataka and Ministry of
Railways and to provide the required land
free of cost to South Western Railways. It
is humbly submitted that during the review
meeting of Railway projects held under the
chairmanship of Hon'ble Chief Minister on
25.07.2018, it was observed that while the
land acquisition and construction cost is
more, there would be fewer commuters in
the Belur-Sakaleshpura Railway lines
section when compared with land
acquisition and construction cost for Belur-
Hassan, therefore, the State Government
and experts have taken decision to seek a
detailed estimate from Railways in order to
take up construction of New Railway line
between Belur-Hassan on 50:50 cost
sharing basis. It is humbly submitted that
the Chief Engineer Construction (East)
South Western Railways, Bengaluru in his
letter dated 18.12.2018 submitted the
comparative statement of the estimated
cost for the Belur-Sakaleshpura Railway line
and Belur-Hassan Railway Line Project, the
details are as given below:
WP No. 16448 of 2021
Project Distance Estimate Estimated Land Updated cost
in Kms cost per cost (Cr) acquisition (taking 6
1 Km cost average
escalation
per year)
Chikkamagaluru- 47 18.35 644.73 46.25 862.45
Sakaleshpura (as on 27.01.2014)
Belur-Sakaleshpura 27 18.35 370.33 27.55 495.45
(as on 27.11.2014)
Hassan-Belur 32 14.44 462.94 63.11 462.08
(as on 30.11.2018)
6. It is humbly submitted that by a bare
perusal of the estimation, it is very clear
that estimate cost per kilo meter is 14.44
crores between Hassan-Belur when
compared to 18.35 crores between Belur-
Sakaleshpura. Hence, the State
Government has taken conscious decision
indicating the cost as one of the basis to
change the proposed laying of railway line
from Belur-Sakaleshpur to Hassan-Belur,
the petitioners cannot have any grievance
for the same. It is humbly submitted that
the State Government has also taken into
account that the number of commuters
between Belur-Sakaleshpur when compared
to Belur-Hassan is very less and it will not
be beneficial for public at large if the new
railway line is laid between Belur-Hassan
instead of Belur-Sakaleshpur. All these
factors have been kept in mind, the State
Government has dropped the proposed
laying of railway line from Belur-
Sakaleshpura to reach Chikkamagalur and
proposed to lay line between Belur-Hassan
railway line at the cost of Rs.462.08 crores.
Hence, on this ground also, the above Writ
Petition is liable to be rejected.
7. It is humbly submitted that neither the
Petitioners nor any commuters have any
grievance as earlier proposed railway line
WP No. 16448 of 2021
was from Chikkamagalur-Belur and then to
Sakaleshpur. Now by dropping the same,
proposed line is from Chikkamagalur-Belur
and then to Hassan and the said Hassan
route also further continues to Sakaleshpur
and then reaches Mangaluru. Hence, the
commuters have no grievance and any
alleged grievance is without any basis and
required to be rejected at the threshold. It
is humbly submitted that new proposed line
from Chikkamagalur-Belur reaches Hassan,
Hassan being junction, railway lines from
Bengaluru reaches Hassan and another
railway line from Arasikere junction and also
reaches Hassan and another railway line
from Mysuru also reaches Hassan. The
commuters travelled from Bengaluru,
Arasikere and Mysuru would also have the
benefit in addition to use this proposed
railway line and commuters from
Chikkamagalur and Belur would also have
additional benefit of using Hassan junction
to reach Mysuru or to reach Bengaluru or to
Arasikere junction. Hence, keeping all these
in mind, the State Government has taken
decision to drop the earlier proposal as per
Government Order dated 17.01.2019."
6. In an identical situation, the Division Bench headed by the
then Chief Justice of this Court, vide order dated 14.06.2019 in
W.P.No.29125/2018, by referring to the decision of the Apex
Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs J.D.
SURYAVANSHI1, has held as under:
(2011) 13 SCC 167
WP No. 16448 of 2021
"It is not the function of the writ Court while
exercising powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India to fix the routes of
passenger railway trains or to decide in
what manner a passenger train between 'A'
station to 'B' station should run. As
observed by the Apex Court, these are the
matters within the exclusive domain of the
Executive. When Executive takes a decision
on such issues involving routes of trains,
there are various factors involved in
decision making. The first factor will always
be technical feasibility, the second factor
will be financial viability and the third factor
will be of course, the convenience of the
commuters. There will be commercial and
various other considerations involved in the
decision making."
7. In J.D.SURYAVANSHI's case (supra), the Apex Court has
referred to its earlier judgment in the case of BALCO
EMPLOYEES' UNION (REGD.) vs UNION OF INDIA2 wherein, at
paragraph 97, it was observed as under:
"97. Judicial interference by way of PIL is
available if there is injury to public
because of dereliction of constitutional or
statutory obligations on the part of the
Government. Here it is not so and in the
sphere of economic policy or reform the
Court is not the appropriate forum.
Every matter of public interest or
curiosity cannot be the subject-matter of
PIL. Courts are not intended to and nor
should they conduct the administration of
(2002) 2 SCC 333
WP No. 16448 of 2021
the country. Courts will interfere only if
there is a clear violation of constitutional
or statutory provisions or non-compliance
by the State with its constitutional or
statutory duties. None of these
contingencies arise in this present case."
(Emphasis supplied by us)
We may state that the above observations of the Apex Court
are applicable to the present writ petition also both in letter and
spirit.
8. In J.D.SURYAVANSHI's case (supra), the Apex Court further
observed as under:
"11. This Court has repeatedly warned
that courts should resist the temptation
to usurp the power of the executive by
entering into arenas which are exclusively
within the domain of the executive. How
many coaches should be attached, what
types of coaches are to be attached, on
which lines what trains should run, what
should be their timings and frequency,
are all matters to be decided by the
Railway Administration using technical
inputs, depending upon financial,
administrative, social and other
considerations. This Court has repeatedly
held that courts should not interfere in
matters of policy or in the day-to-day
functioning of any departments of
Government or statutory bodies. Even
within the executive, the need for
separation of roles has been voiced."
(Emphasis supplied by us)
WP No. 16448 of 2021
9. The learned counsel for the petitioners made an attempt to
submit that there was a communication from the then Minister
of Railways, Government of India, New Delhi to the then Chief
Minister of Karnataka stating that no change in the alignment is
contemplated. We are unable to accept the said submission of
the learned counsel. Merely because there was an exchange of
communication, the State Government cannot complete the
project when there are administrative or financial difficulties.
Another reason for not accepting the said submission is the
observations of the Apex Court in the very judgment of
J.D.SURYAVANSHI (supra) wherein, at paragraph 13, it is
observed that:
"13. The record of the case shows that
Railways had made all efforts to comply
with the requirements/earlier directions
of the High Court. Courtesies extended by
the Railways should not be taken as
readiness to comply with impractical
suggestions and unreasonable directions.
The malaise of interference in the
functioning of the Railway Administration
is a matter of concern. Courts,
bureaucracy and political leaders should
give up the tendency to compel or
pressurize the Railway Administration to
cater to only parts of the country
particularly to the State or area to which
they belong. Any such attempt to
- 10 -
WP No. 16448 of 2021
promote only regional interests would
affect the national interest. The Railways
should have the freedom and
independence to grow, develop, improve
and serve the nation. Be that as it may."
(Emphasis supplied by us)
10. In view of the observations of the Apex Court in the cases
cited supra, we are of the view that the writ petition is devoid
of merits and deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the same
is dismissed.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
BKV
