IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 2138 of 1988 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- SOMVANSHINA SAHASRARJUN KASHATRIYA SAMAN Versus UNION OF INDIA -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR KS JHAVERI for Petitioners MR JC SHETH for Respondent No. 1, 2, 3, 4 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 25/02/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT #. Heard learned counsel for the parties. #. It is a Public Interest Litigation. Challenge has been made to the order at Annexure-A, the decision of the Chief Operational Superintendent, Western Railway under which it is decided to discontinue pantry car services in the Navjivan Express. Earlier this court granted interim relief in favour of the petitioner but on 18/8/98 the interim relief was vacated. It is a matter of decision of the Western Railways and in fact a policy decision. I fail to see how any such grievance can be made by the petitioners. They fail to show otherwise also how the public would suffer by disconnection of pantry car facility in the aforesaid train. On being asked by the court, the learned counsel for the petitioners failed to show how any prejudice cause to the petitioner by this decision of the Railway. He further on being asked by the court is unable to show whether this facility earlier discontinued is restored or not. During the course of the arguments it is given out by the counsel for the respondent that most probably this facility has been restored in this train. Otherwise also it is always open to the petitioners and other interested persons to make representations in this respect to the concerned railway authorities and this matter is always open to the review. In the result, this Special Civil Application fails and the same is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim, relief, if any granted by this court stands vacated. No order as to costs. (S.K.Keshote, J.) *Pvv