HC notice to Railways on plea challenging ‘superfast surcharge’ on Malgudi Express

Petitioner claims train is operating below the average speed of 55 km/hour

January 02, 2020 09:50 pm | Updated 09:50 pm IST - Bengaluru

BANGALORE, 11/12/2007: A view of Karnataka High Court in Bangalore.
Photo: V. Sreenivasa Murthy 11-12-2007

BANGALORE, 11/12/2007: A view of Karnataka High Court in Bangalore. Photo: V. Sreenivasa Murthy 11-12-2007

The High Court of Karnataka on Thursday ordered issue of notice to the Indian Railways on a PIL petition, which has questioned the collection of “superfast surcharge” for Malgudi Express plying between Mysuru and Yelahanka in Bengaluru though the train is not operated with the average specified speed.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar passed the order on the petition filed by Mohammed Dastagir, a resident of Mysuru city. Pointing out that the average speed of the train should be 55 km/hour or more for designating the train as “superfast” express on broad guage line, the petitioner claimed that the train was not moving in the average specified speed even going by the official travel time declared in the railway timetable.

It was stated in the petition that the Railway’s timetable had fixed 3 hours and 35 minutes as the travel time from Mysuru to Yelahanka, and 3 hours and 15 minutes from Yelahanka to Mysuru to cover the distance of 155.8 km between the two points. However, the petitioner said that the travel time in the timetable discloses that the train is actually travelling at an average speed of only 43.81 km/per hour from Mysuru to Yelahanka and 48.31 km/hour from Yelahanka to Mysuru, and not the average speed of 55 km/hour to be qualified as “superfast” express.

Pointing out that a “superfast surcharge” in the range of ₹15 to ₹75 was being levied depending upon on class of travel in the Malgudi Express, which had been designated as “superfast express” with effect from August 15, 2018, the petitioner alleged that levy of “superfast surcharge” was illegal.

Contending that arrival of the train at both end points were delayed, as per the information available on the Railways website, in the range of 10 minutes to 59 minutes during September-November, 2019, the petitioner claimed that this delay had further reduced the average speed of the train, much below than the required 55 km/hour.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.