IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2111 of 2009 1. Patna Jila Tamtam Mazddor Union, Head Office, Anisabad, Patna through its Secretary, Chunnu Singh, son of Sri Bhagwati Prasad Singh, resident of village Nehruchak, P.S. Alamganj, District Patna, 2. Nathuni Rai son of late Dwarika Rai, resident of mohalla Mandiri, Police Station Buddha Colony, District Patna, … …. … Petitioners Versus 1. The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur, District Vaishali, 2. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur, District Vaishali, 3. The Divisional Manager, East Central Railway, Danapur, District Patna, 4. The Station Manager, Patna Junction, Patna, 5. The Assistant Engineer(Works), East Central Railway, Patna, 6. The State of Bihar, 7. The District Magistrate, Patna, 8. The Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna through its City Commissioner, 9. The City Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna, …. Respondents For the Petitioners: Mr. S.P. Mukherjee, Sr. Advocate, M/s Shanti Pratap & A.K. Pathak, Advocates For the Railways : Mr. D.K. Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Mahesh Prasad, Advocate. … 6 14.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the Railways. There is no dispute that a shed exists near Patna Railway Station since about 1928 and that shed was built by Maharajadhiraj of Darbhanga Estate for parking of Tamtams or other horse-drawn carts. Now the Railway Authorities want that the shed should be demolished, 2 probably with a view to improve the area for general convenience of the travelling people. Petitioner no. 1 is a registered society and petitioner no. 2 is one of its member. The society is of tamtam or tonga drivers and they want the Court to restrain the Railways from demolishing that shed, which has been under the use of the tonga drivers from last several decades. The claim is being resisted by the Railways, who have filed counter affidavit and asserted title over the concerned land and their right to put the land to good use for the convenience of the people. In the facts of the case, this Court finds helpless in providing relief to the petitioners in exercise of its writ jurisdiction and that also by way of public interest litigation. It is difficult to decide, in the facts of the case, whether public interest demands removal of the shed from the land in question for the convenience of the people. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation in the matter before the head of the Railway Establishment at Patna or Danapur to 3 reconsider the matter and if possible, to allow the petitioners’ association to use the same shed or another suitable place for parking of their tongas as and when such occasion arises. It is expected that such representation of the petitioners shall be considered objectively by the authorities keeping in view the interest of the travelling public as well as interest of the persons, who are tonga drivers. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ) SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)