WP/5578/2026 of Bakka Rajini Vs The Union of India on 2 March 2026

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in constructing a boundary wall at Methodist colony, near Begumpet Railway Station, Hyderabad, thereby blocking the long- standing pedestrian access across the railway tracks, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles L4 and 2l of the Constitution of India, and consequently to direct the respondents to restore access or consider the representations submitted by the petitioners.

2. Heard Smt. Vellanki Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners; smt. PNV Mahalakshmi, Iearned standing counsel for central Government, for respondent Nos.l to 3 and learned Government pleader for Revenue, for respondent No.4. /

3' Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and neariy l,OO0 women domestic workers residing in Matajinagar and Brahman,,adi, Begumpet, have been using the pedestrian access across the railway tracks near Begurnpet Railway station for more than three decades t. reach their workplaces in Methodist Colony, Umanagar and Kundanbagh areas. She submits that the said access has been open, peaceful a:rd uninterrupted for over 3O years, r,vith the knowledge and tacit acquiescence of the railway authorities. She submits that the sudden construction of a boundary wall by respondent Nos.2 and 3, without nor:ice, consultation or provision of an alternative route, has severely affi:cted the livelihood of the petitioners, compelling them to take a lonl;er route of nearly two kilometres and incur additional transportation expenses. She submits that several affected women workers havr: sl1s26y lost employment or suffered reduction in income. She further submits that representations dated 23.01 .2026 and 17 '02'2026 virere submitted to the authorities requesting restoration of regulated acoess or provision of an alternative arrangement, but no action has bet:n taken so far.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for Central Government, on instructions, rsubmits that the location in question falls on a busy railway sectio:r where approximately 100 trains pass daily in both directions at speeds up to 11o kmph. She submits that unauthorized crossing of railway tracks at non-designated places poses serious risk to human lifeiancl affects safe train operations. she submits that under ,/

l the provisions of ,,h". Railways Act, 1989, trespassing and crossing at non-permitted locations is prohibited. she submits that the constrrrction of the boundary wall on the subject premises is a bona fide safety measure undertaken in the interest of public safetSr and safe railway operations. She further submits that the said action of the respondent authorities is lawful, in accordance with safet5r norms, and intended to prevent accidents and loss of life.

5. This court has considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and perused the record.

6. The grievance of the petitioners primarily concerns the hardship caused due to closure of the pedestrian access through the subject premises and the alleged inaction of the respondents in considering their representations dated 23.01.2026 and 17.O2.2026. At the same time, the stand of the respondent authorities is that the construction of the boundary wall on the subject premises has been undertaken as a safety measure in view of heavy train movement and in compliance with statutory provisions.

7. without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions and having regard to the limited relief that can be granted at this stage, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met by directing the respondent authorities to consider and dispose of the aforesaid representations submitted by the petitioner^ \

a

8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent authorities to consider the representations dated 2g.Ot.2026 and 17.02.2026 submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, within a periocl of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Misce.laneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/. B. REKHA RANI ISTANT REGISTRAR !3 //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER

1. The Secretary, Ministry of Railways, The Union of lndia, Rai Bhavan road New Delhi.

2. The General Manager, South Central Railways, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad, Telangana State.

3. The Divir;ional Railway Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad Division. To,

4. The District Collector, Hyderabad District, at Hyderabad.

5. One CC to SMT. VELLANKI KRISHNA, Advocate [OPUC]

6. One CC to SMT. P.N.V. MAHALAKSHMI (SC FOR CENTRAL GOW) [oPUc]

7. Two CCs to GP tourl

8. Two CD tlopies FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana BN fuu

CC TODAY HIGH COURT DATED:0,210312026 --.1: r"itl i-\i;-. A. 0 2 ul\fi ?$tE .:) (-\ rJ -f-i, t

ORDER

WP.No.5578 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION KS WITHOUT zlolzc .