JUDGMENT

RANGANATH MISRA, J. :— The petitioner in this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is a resident of Sultanbattery area in the State of Kerala and describing himself as a commuter of the Indian Railways he has alleged violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 and claims reliefs of mandamus to the Union of India for implementing the reports of the Kunzru, Wanchoo and Sikri Committees, appointing a fact finding Commission to inquire and report about the numerous train accidents from 1970 onwards and for several other directions to the Union Government and the instrumentalities connected with the administration of the railways. As the petition which the petitioner, an allopathic doctor by profession, had himself drafted and filed was unduly long and repetitive, written submission with the assistance of counsel crystallising the issues for determination by the Court was filed, leave to amend the writ petition was granted and notice thereon was issued on August 2, 1982. The petitioner alleged, inter alia, that the Railways in this country are owned by the Central Government and on account of failure to fulfil the constitutional, statutory and commercial obligations by the Railways, adequate safety protection to the passengers and their properties is not available. The Indian Railways Act, 1890 (Act for short) has prescribed several safety measures based upon experience, the Railway Board through which apex body the administration is run and controlled has also prescribed rules and issued instructions which are not being properly implemented. The Union Government had appointed three high powered Committees in the post-independence period, namely, the Kunzru, Wanchoo and Sikri Committees to investigate into the affairs of the Railways with particular reference to accidents and though detailed and useful recommendations have been made by these Committees, there has been no adequate implementation thereof. Particular reference has been made to the unmanned level crossings, increasing human error as a contributing factor to accidents, non-allocation of adequate funds for improvements, improper utilisation of the assets and facilities, inefficiency in the administration at different levels, prevalence and increase of indiscipline, frequency of thefts, robberies and murders at passengers, ineffective checking and supervisory system, want of replacement of equipment and repairs to bridges as also non-provision of adequate facilities to passengers.

2. The Joint Director (Safety) has filed a counter affidavit in answer to the Rule an behalf of the respondents. It has been averted that the recommendations of the Accidents Enquiry Committees were examined and implemented within the limits of financial and material resource. So far as manned level crossings are concerned them were as many as 14471 of them as on March 1, 1982; unmanned level crossings were provided mostly as roads where the volume of road and train traffic was low. It has been further pleaded that periodic review to undertaken about manning of unmanned level crossings and opening of new level crossings in consultation with appropriate State Governments. Initially it used to be the obligation of the respective State Governments to provide for such level crossings at their cost in view of the accepted position that at a level crossing the right of way is of the train in preference to the traffic on the road. As that arrangement was not working well, with effect from April 1, 1966, a Railway Safety Works Fund his been set up and expenses are being met out of it. From 1978 potentially hazardous unmanned level crossings with a volume of traffic of more than 6000 train vehicle units or poor approach visibility are being manned in a phased manner at the cost of the Railways and control at the gate is also being improved. As on June 1, 1982, there were as many as 27233 unmanned level crossings an the Railways and if all of them are to be manned,