• Restricted access to a badminton court to a certain class

I am a Railway employee working at Sambalpur. There is a building constructed on the name of Cement Godown by Railways with public fund and never it was used for the purpose it was intended. Later the same was converted as a Badminton hall with wooden flooring at the cost of Railways (public fund) and the same is declared as part of (Railway) Officer's club and the access is restricted to certain class of employees (only gazetted officers). Very often the same hall is used as party floor and meeting floor though there is another building of 3000 sq.ft. adjacent to it  available which is also declared as officers club. At the will and wish of the officers they are allowing other Gr-C and Gr-D employees to play at the badminton hall, not as a right. Now the same hall is completely closed down for access for Railway employees other than gazetted officers.The 3000 sq. ft. building was also constructed with public fund (around 1.5 crores) for the office Dy.Chief Engineer/Con/E.CoRly/SBP and that office was never operational from this buidling and the same building was converted as Officers club. Again in the year of 2010-11 a separate building was constructed with an expenditure of Rs. 1 Crore for Dy.Chief Engineer/Con/SBP. 
As per clause no. 2506 of Establishment manual of Railways, it is mentioned therein "Recognition is accorded for the purpose of enabling the gazetted railway servants to communicate their needs to Government or to Government officers"
clause no. 2503 says: Every gazetted Railway servant of the same class must be eligible for membership of the association.
Clause no. 2504 says: No persons who are not gazetted railway servants of the class concerned shall be elected as members or office bearers of the Association.
in context of the above, being a Gr-C employee, how I can claim my right to play at the Badminton hall (which is the only badminton hall constructed as per standards in health point view) as a physical activity for upkeeping my good health. At the same time I would see all the Railway employees are conferred with   equal rights in such cases of sport related matters.
If a person's access to the premises of public places, of general need, based on cast is an atrocity.
In pre-independence days when our grand father seen a notice board with "Indians and Dogs are not allowed", it flared their blood. Now also, hearing such events flares my blood also.
Now we got independence, but the situations are same. feeling " Old wine in new bottle"
Gone the Cast systems, but the menace took its incarnation in terms of class.
Hence, I require your honorable suggestions in this regard to fight such inequalities in occasions of general purpose. I well remember our country is a socialist, democratic republic country.
Also suggest me what are the information I have to collect through RTI for genuine case of legal fight.
Asked 1 year ago in Civil Law from Sambalpur, Odisha
If you are facing discrimination and inequality that is violation of fundamental right you can move to high court against the public body who is involved in such discrimination.

Further in the RTI you can see any information under the sun which is not restricted.
Shaveta Chaudhary (Sanghi)
Advocate, Chandigarh
821 Answers
60 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1. Everywhere Rly Officer's club restrict non members to use its facilities,

2. Membership of Officer's club is restricted amongst officers only,

3. If the said club has been permitted by the appropriate authority to have and oparate badminton court in the same primeses, then you may not be allowed to have access to the said facility of the said club being its non member.
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
11259 Answers
205 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Civil Lawyers

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
21637 Answers
1128 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
12576 Answers
120 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
17390 Answers
425 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
11259 Answers
205 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3336 Answers
122 Consultations
4.8 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2635 Answers
38 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
804 Answers
36 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1847 Answers
18 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1932 Answers
61 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1275 Answers
82 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0