Bombay High Court Uphold Central Railway's decision to decongest Dadar Station by moving stalls, emphasizing public interest over individual business locations.

The Bombay High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the Central Railway's decision to relocate catering stalls at Dadar Railway Station. The judgment, delivered by a vacation bench comprising Justices Sandeep V. Marne and Dr. Neela Gokhale, upholds the railway authorities' policy aimed at reducing congestion on platforms for passenger safety and convenience.

Petitioner Rukmani V. Agarwal, a catering stall allottee at Dadar Railway Station, contested multiple orders directing the relocation of her stall. The relocation orders, issued between February and May 2024, instructed her to move her stall from its current location near the footbridge on Platform Nos. 9 and 10 to a spot beyond the Electric Motor Unit (EMU) halt points on the same platform. Agarwal argued that this new location would adversely affect her business due to its distance from the main passenger flow and its proximity to a urinal, which she claimed would be unhygienic for her customers.

The court observed that the initial feasibility report dated November 7, 2022, which suggested a different location for Agarwal's stall, was primarily based on her preferences and did not represent a final decision by the railway administration. Instead, a comprehensive policy decision made by the Divisional Office of Central Railways on February 9, 2024, aimed to decongest the platforms by uniformly relocating eight stalls beyond the EMU halt points.

Addressing the core issue, the court emphasized that the policy decision to move the stalls was taken to ensure the free flow of passengers during peak hours, which is crucial for one of Mumbai's busiest railway stations. The court noted, "It is a matter of common knowledge that during peak hours, severe congestion is caused on platforms, particularly at Dadar Station on account of lakhs of passengers boarding and alighting local trains."

The court rejected the argument that the relocation would violate Agarwal's right to livelihood, stating that the interests of public safety and passenger convenience outweigh individual business preferences. "Railway platforms exist mainly for traveling passengers, and free flow passenger movement and their safety is paramount than the business interest of the Petitioner in operating the catering stall," the court asserted.

Justice Marne remarked, "If the Railway Administration believes that for ensuring decongestion and free flow of passenger movement, catering stalls must be shifted beyond EMU halt points, the private interest of the Petitioner, of securing better profits from her stall, must yield to the interest of lakhs of passengers using the platform."

The Bombay High Court's decision reinforces the authority of the railway administration to implement policies that prioritize public interest and passenger safety. By upholding the relocation orders, the judgment underscores the judiciary's support for administrative measures designed to improve the efficiency and safety of public transport infrastructure. The ruling sets a precedent for future cases where individual business interests conflict with broader public safety concerns.

Date of Decision: 15 May 2024

Rukmani V. Agarwal vs. Union of India & Others