Dismissed

K.Ashraf v. Union of India

Kerala HC16 Jun 2020WP(C)/9594/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the claimed non-implementation of the Adarsh Railway Station Scheme at Parappanangadi. The court observed that the station falls under Category 'D' with eligible amenities provided and disposed of the petition while reserving liberty to approach the appropriate authority.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of recording Railways statement; liberty reserved to approach appropriate forum.

K.Ashraf Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.9594 OF 2013(Y)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

K.ASHRAF AGED 47 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED NAHA, CONVENOR, PARAPPANANGADI JANAKEEYA ACTION COMMITTEE, VYAPARI BHAVAN, ANCHAPPURA, PARAPPANANGADI,RESIDING AT KIZHAKKINIYAKATH HOUSE, ANJAPPURA, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SRI.HARISH R. MENON

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, NEW DELHI 110001

¶11

2 SOUTHERN RAILWAYS REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, ZONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI

¶12

3 DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAYS, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD

¶13

R1 BY SRI.C.S.DIAS,SC, RAILWAYS R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.S.DIASSC RAILWAYS R1-3 BY SRI.S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN, SC, RAILWAYS

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P.(C) No.9594 of 2013

¶16

¶17

Dated this the 16^th day of June, 2020

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The grievance highlighted in this writ petition is regarding the implementation of 'Adarsh Railway Station Scheme' at the Parappanangadi Railway Station. The petitioner alleges that all the amenities under the Scheme was not provided at the Station.

¶20

2. The Railways has filed a counter affidavit,

¶21

stating that the Railway Stations under the Adarsh Railway Station Scheme are categorised differently and Parappanangadi Railway Station falls under the category 'D' and all amenities available to Category 'D' have already been provided.

¶22

3. In such circumstances, I am inclined to

¶23

dispose of the writ petition, recording the statement of the Railways that all eligible amenities have been provided at the Parappanangadi Railway Station and

¶24

W.P.(C) No.9594 of 2013

¶25

¶26

reserving the petitioner's liberty to ventilate his grievance, if any subsisting, before the appropriate

forum/authority.

sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

Scl/16.06

W.P.(C) No.9594 of 2013

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 15-06-2012 AND THE REPLY RECEIVED THEREON DATED 25-062012

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 23-08-2012 FILED UNDER THE RTI ACT

¶37

EXHIBIT P3 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THEREPLY DATED 27-09-2012

¶38

EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 17-09-2009 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT

¶39

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS

¶40

R3(1) COPY OF THE LETTER NO.2012/LM/PA/3/5 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REG. - COMPREHENSIVE INSTRUCTIONS

¶41

FOR PROVISION OF PASSENGER AMENITIES AT STATIONS. R3(2) COPY OF PASSENGER AMENITIES DETAILS AS ON 31.3.2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶42

R3(4) COPY OF THE LETTER NO.J/C14/PA/ADARSH STATION/01/13 WITH ANNEXURE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

K.Ashraf v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Ashraf v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.v.Sreejeshkumar Vs Sri.E.S.Unnikrishnan

A.H.Jabbar & 2 Others Vs Government of Kerala and 3 Others

Kolambil Hamza Haji Vs State of Kerala

Bijoy.P., Vs Bank of Baroda

Augustine Joseph Vs State of Kerala

T.Sreedharan Vs M.P.Sivadasan