Madras HC Orders Chennai Metro to Enforce Priority Seating for Elderly & Disabled

The Madras High Court has directed Chennai Metro Rail Limited to conduct surprise inspections to ensure priority seating for senior citizens and persons with disabilities is not misused. The order came while disposing of a PIL filed by an advocate who argued the current sticker-based system is ineffective as able-bodied passengers often refuse to vacate seats. The petitioner sought exclusive reservation of seats, similar to women's coaches, but the state government opposed this, stating current rules suffice if properly enforced. The court left the decision on exclusive reservation to CMRL but mandated strict compliance with existing priority norms through monitoring and prompt action on complaints.

Key Points: Madras HC Directs Chennai Metro on Priority Seating Compliance

  • Court orders surprise Metro inspections
  • Action on complaints for priority seating
  • Petitioner argued stickers are ineffective
  • State opposed exclusive reservation
2 min read

Madras HC directs Chennai metro to ensure priority seating for senior citizens, PwDs

Madras High Court orders surprise checks in Chennai Metro to ensure senior citizens and persons with disabilities are given priority seating as per norms.

"There is a clear distinction between priority seating and seats exclusively earmarked... What is currently being implemented is only priority seating, not exclusive reservation. - V.B.R. Menon"

Chennai, Jan 19

The Madras High Court on Monday directed Chennai Metro Rail Limited to conduct surprise inspections inside Metro trains and take appropriate action to ensure that senior citizens and persons with disabilities are not denied seats earmarked for them.

The direction was issued by a First Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan while disposing of a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by advocate V.B.R. Menon.

The Bench also instructed CMRL to initiate immediate and appropriate action whenever it receives specific complaints from senior citizens or PwDs regarding denial of priority seating.

In his petition, Menon argued that the existing system of marking certain seats with stickers indicating "priority seating" for senior citizens and persons with disabilities was ineffective. He submitted that these seats were almost always occupied by able-bodied men who often refused to vacate them even when elderly or disabled passengers boarded the train.

According to the petitioner, the issue could be resolved only by reserving a reasonable number of seats exclusively for senior citizens and PwDs in every Metro train, similar to the practice of reserving an entire coach for women.

"There is a clear distinction between priority seating and seats exclusively earmarked for senior citizens and the physically challenged. What is currently being implemented is only priority seating, not exclusive reservation," Menon told the court, insisting that exclusive seats would prevent misuse and ensure dignity and comfort for vulnerable passengers.

Opposing the plea, State Government Pleader A. Edwin Prabakar informed the court that able-bodied passengers were permitted to occupy the earmarked seats only in the absence of senior citizens or PwDs. Once such passengers were present, the seats were required to be offered to them.

He further pointed out that Metro commuters could lodge complaints through the intercom facility available in every coach, upon which necessary steps would be taken by CMRL staff.

He also noted that CMRL had begun making oral announcements reminding passengers about priority seating for senior citizens and persons with disabilities.

After hearing both sides, the Bench observed that it would be for CMRL to consider the petitioner's suggestion of exclusive seat reservation. Until such a decision is taken, the court directed CMRL to conduct surprise inspections and ensure strict compliance with the existing priority seating norms.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rajesh Q
Good step, but enforcement is the key. Who will conduct these "surprise inspections"? More government staff? The metro should use its CCTV and impose fines on the spot for those who refuse to vacate. A small fine of ₹500 will make people think twice. Selfishness has become a norm in public spaces.
D
David E
While the intent is perfect, I have a practical concern. During non-peak hours, keeping seats exclusively empty might lead to inefficient use of capacity. The priority system *should* work if people have basic civic sense. Maybe stronger awareness campaigns and clear, large signage are needed first before moving to full reservation.
S
Suresh O
As a senior citizen myself, I thank the court. The "intercom facility" the govt pleader mentioned is hardly used because it creates a scene. Nobody wants public confrontation. The fear of a surprise inspection by an authority figure will work much better. Hope CMRL implements this strictly and doesn't treat it as just another court order to file away.
A
Ananya R
This is about basic humanity, not just rules. We teach children to respect elders, but we don't practice it. The ladies' coach model works brilliantly in Chennai metro. Replicating that for seniors and PwDs will remove all ambiguity. Let's not oppose good ideas just because they require a slight change. #RespectElders
V
Vikram M
The court's direction is fine, but let's be real. Our population is huge and metro is crowded. Instead of more reservations, can we improve last-mile connectivity and frequency so overall crowding reduces? Also,

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50