JUDGMENT : 1. The matter has been heard through video conferencing with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. None of the parties has raised any complaint regarding audio and visual quality. 2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by way of public interest litigation, seeking inter alia direction upon the respondent-Indian Railway to restore operation of train in Dhanbad-Chandrapura via Katras line and declare non-operation of train cause substantial public harm and it will also cause loss to public exchequer. 3. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, read hereunder as: The writ petitioner claims to be an Advocate and regular practicing in Civil Court, Dhanbad having permanent resident of Masjid Patti, Katrasgarh Akashkanali, Dhanbad in the State of Jharkhand, who on his behalf has filed the instant public interest litigation, claiming therein for redressal of public injury and harm caused to the resident of Katrasgarh and nearby places due to non-operation of the train in Dhanbad-Chandrapura via Katras line which is lying part of Dhanbad Railway Division and is coming under East Central Railway. Dhanbad-Chandrapura via Katras line is operating since the year 1913 for connecting Chandrapura to Mohuda, merging it to Gomo-Mohuda- Aadra and Kharagpur line when it was under railway in Jharia Coalfield. Subsequently, the aforesaid railway line was amalgamated with East India Railway and the railway line known as Dhanbad-Katras was started in the year 1913 which was operational but due to some technical reason it was closed sometime in the year 1917. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, due to the closure of the aforesaid railway line, the common people of the said area is suffering a lot but the railway administration is not taking any care for its operation, while the other line which was also closed, has been restarted or the lines have been diverted so that the trains may go through the diverted line through its destination but no such efforts have been taken making Dhanbad-Chandrapura via Katras operational and it is closed since the year 1917 and hence the instant writ petition has been filed on the pretext since the people of the local area are suffering a lot. 4. Mr. 4. Mr. Afaque Rashidi, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner has made due representations before the competent authority of the railway but no satisfactory reason has been assigned for not making the aforesaid railway line operational and therefore, the instant writ petition in the nature of public interest litigation. 5. Mr. Gautam Rakesh, learned counsel for the Respondent-Railway, has submitted that, for technical reason, the operation in the aforesaid railway line has been stopped which have been mentioned himself by the writ petitioner at paragraph 20 and 23 of the writ petition, wherein it has been stated inter alia that the train services on the 34 Kilometers Dhanbad-Chandrapura line have been suspended from 15.06.2017 after the Railway Board has received a survey report submitted by Director General of Mines, Safety, reporting that the safety of 14 Kilometers tracks passing through Baseria, Sendra, Bansjora, Katras Chotidih, New Aakashkinare, South Govindpur and Tetulia collieries could not be guaranteed as there is underground fire in the coal mines under the area over which the aforesaid railway line is passing. Accordingly, it has been submitted that in view of the report of the Director General of Mines, Safety, the Railway Board has got no option but to take a decision for suspending the traffic on the aforesaid railway line which is in the public interest and hence, the instant writ petition cannot be treated to be in the larger interest of the people, rather, if the railway line is made operational, it may cause danger to the public life. He further submits that it would further be evident from the statement made at paragraph 23 indicating that a news was published in the ‘Telegraph’ dated 08.09.2018 under the caption heading “Dhanbad-Chandrapura track not safe for train” hence it would not be proper for the railway to open the railway line and therefore, the instant writ petition is fit to be dismissed. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and found from the pleadings made in the writ petition that the writ petition has been filed praying for direction upon the Railway-Board to make Dhanbad-Chandrapura line operational. We have tested the pleadings to assess as to whether on the facts pleaded in the writ petition, the instant writ petition can be said to be a public interest litigation. We have tested the pleadings to assess as to whether on the facts pleaded in the writ petition, the instant writ petition can be said to be a public interest litigation. It is the specific case of the writ petitioner, as has been pleaded at paragraph 20 and 23, that the operation in the railway line has been suspended on account of the report submitted by Director General of Mines, Safety, reporting therein that in between 34 Kilometers of the track of the aforesaid line, 14 Kilometers track is not safe since the railway track is passing through the coal mines area under which underground fire is there. The petitioner has further stated at paragraph 23, making the reference of the daily newspaper clipping published in the ‘Telegraph’ dated 08.09.2018 to the effect that the Dhanbad-Chandrapura railway line is not safe for train. 7. Thus, it stands admitted in the writ petition itself that the reason of suspension of the traffic in the aforesaid railway line is in the public interest for the aforesaid reason. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that any direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for starting Railway Traffic on the concerned sector would not be proper. It is the railway authority, which consists of experts body, which has to take a decision in that regard. Therefore, we are refraining ourselves in interfering with the policy decision of the railway authorities. Further, this Court is also not inclined to interfere by passing an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, for the reason that the Director General, Mines, Safety, which is a competent body under the Mines Act to assess the decision of mining area has reported that the area from where the line is passing through is over the underground fire in the area, as such, in our view, there would always a possibility of subduction of the same which may lead to casualty also. 8. This Court, after taking into consideration the facts as above and in the entirety of the facts and circumstances, is of the view that no positive direction can be issued in the instant writ petition. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed.