TRAMS and the unique sound of its bells have always been part and parcel of the City of Joy. The tram was first introduced in the city in 1873. Back then, a horse-driven carriage was introduced from Sealdah to Armenian Ghat. With time, trams have become a part of the city's heritage. They not only provide the working population with a cheap means of transportation but trams driven by electricity also do not contribute to air pollution in the city.Thanks to Bengali and Hindi cinemas, trams are hot spots where the hero romances his heartthrob. Due to this, trams have come to symbolise Kolkata like no other modern invention.For these reasons, any judicial case involving trams is not a simple one but involves the history, the heritage, the emotions and the very identity of Kolkata.On January 16, a division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya heard a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a group of citizens who have collectively formed a trust known as People United for Better Living in Calcutta (PUBLIC).The PIL has been filed as the petitioners allege that once the state government completes its ongoing process of bituminisation, it will remove the tram and, eventually, sell the tram depots to private players. The petition filed by the PUBLIC alleges that the decision to discard trams was not taken on the basis of any scientific study..Thanks to Bengali and Hindi cinemas, trams are hot spots where the hero romances his heartthrob. Due to this, trams have come to symbolise Kolkata like no other modern invention..The petition further argues, “Kolkata has repeatedly topped the list of global cities threatened by climate change. Data also show that the transport sector is a major contributor to carbon emissions…“Removal of trams is contrary to this professed goal and goes against the fundamental tenets of transport planning in the context of climate change, i.e., zero-emission. Whereas many cities around the world are reviving their tram systems to address the issue of climate change, it is inconceivable as to why the respondent authorities would weed out the tram system in the city of Kolkata when Kolkata is hugely threatened by climate change.”.The missing innings: Addressing parental leave in cricket.The petition cites several examples of cities where trams have been revived, including London and Paris, which are undergoing what the petition calls a “tram renaissance”. Istanbul is another good example of a city where trams have served well.In such a situation, discarding the tram, which is a sustainable mode of transport, is arbitrary and unwise, the petition argues. Short-term monetary benefits cannot be pitted against the long-term health and sustainability of the city. Discarding trams would affect the movement, environment, health and social equity of the citizens of Kolkata, the petition further argues.What happened on the first day of the hearing?On the first day of the hearing on May 8, 2023, the counsel for PUBLIC, Advocate Siddhartha Mitra, had reminded the Bench that the government is celebrating 150 years of the tram in Kolkata.To this, the Bench had reminded everyone present, “Some award has also been given.” The petitioner, while arguing, had stressed the point that the entire exercise of removing the tram network has been done in a “data vacuum”.“Why do you want to do away with it? It is a heritage. Why not replace the carriage?” the Bench had asked with concern. The petitioner had then pointed out the ulterior motive behind the exercise..The petition cites several examples of cities where trams have been revived, including London and Paris, which are undergoing what the petition calls a “tram renaissance”..“What can you do to modernise?” the Bench had asked of the State. “The State is trying hard,” the counsel for the State had responded. He had further stated that he would seek proper instruction and come to the court. The division Bench of the high court, while concluding the hearing and staying the ongoing process of bituminisation, had stated, “We make it clear that further bituminising or removing the tram tracks shall not be done till a decision is taken by this court in this writ petition.”What did the court say on another PIL related to trams which was subsequently tagged?The division Bench of the high court presided over by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and also comprising Justice Ajay Gupta, while hearing a similar PIL in 2022 related to trams, had not only allowed the petitions to be merged with this PIL but had in its Order dated June 21, 2023 observed:.Indian National Congress versus the State of India, RSS, BJP and Ors.“It is an undisputed fact that trams in Kolkata are part of its heritage. The respondents being a welfare State are also to preserve the heritage for the purpose of not only enjoying the same for the present but also to preserve the same for posterity.“When the public of Kolkata is very proud that the Durga Puja festival has been given heritage tag by UNESCO, equally they should be proud to have the tram services restored, maintained and operated efficiently in the city of Kolkata.”In the same Order, it went on to note, “The petitioner had filed an application under the provisions of the Right to Information Act (R.T.I.) seeking for various details and from the reply given by the public information officer it is seen that the total length of the tramway lines in the city of Kolkata was 116.62 kilometers and the tramway line currently used by WBTC is only 33.04 kilometers and trams are operated only in three routes and in twenty routes which has not been operated.” The division Bench of the high court presided over by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and also comprising Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya by its Order dated August 7, 2023 had ordered that an expert committee of 11 members be formed. On the second day of the hearing of the PIL, the Bench had noted with certain anguish:“It is not clear as to why the committee has not met despite the fact that the committee was constituted with the consent of the State after much deliberations and discussions and also after hearing the then learned Advocate General who appeared for the State.”While continuing its earlier restraining Order of restraining, it had adjourned the case..Third day of the hearingOn the third day of the hearing, the advocate of the applicant stated that no meeting had been held by the committee since January 2024. To which the division Bench of the high court presided over by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and also comprising Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya responded, “How can this be so? It is public property… You want to circumvent our Order, do it on our face.” Then the State’s advocate assured the Bench that they would hold meetings on a regular basis pursuant to the direction issue on December 17, 2024.While continuing to restrain the State from further bituminisation and also at the same time to re-bituminise those tracks that have been bituminised despite the restraining Order, the court noted:.Bulldozer action judgment: Supreme Court guards against State overreach.“It is very hard to believe that some miscreants have done the bituminisation on a busy public road under public gaze and that the authorities concerned were oblivious of what was happening.“Since the report shows that there was no direction for bituminisation, we direct that those tram tracks that were illegally bituminised to be restored and the bituminised be removed and a report be filed in this regard supported with photographs on the next hearing date…“The reason for which the court had passed the Order in the writ petition is that trams are a part of the cultural ethos of the city of Kolkata and to our knowledge, no other city in the country trams are being operated. Dismantling and closing down the tram services is an easy task but nonetheless the respondents being the welfare state should also bear in mind to preserve the cultural heritage of the city of Kolkata.“When the government department has constituted a separate wing to preserve heritage buildings, we have failed to understand as to why such thought process is not happening so far as the trams in the city of Kolkata. There are other countries where trams are operated one of which comes to our knowledge is Switzerland and identically trams ply in the middle of the road which was cited as one of the reasons by the Kolkata police that it is resulting in accidents. In fact, this stand taken by the Kolkata police was reiterated by the learned Advocate General on the last hearing date.”.After the Order was passed, Bonani Kakar the President of PUBLIC, while speaking exclusively to The Leaflet, said she was shocked to see that despite the Order of the high court, the bituminisation was not stopped..After the Order was passed, Bonani Kakar the President of PUBLIC, while speaking exclusively to The Leaflet, said she was shocked to see that despite the Order of the high court, the bituminisation was not stopped.The stretch running from Kalighat (where the Chief Minister resides) to Harish Mukherjee Road saw the bituminisation of tram tracks for about one kilometer. This happened between August–September, 2024. The advocate representing the State took the stand that the State was not aware of the fact as to who did this. “It is a sad situation to have to hear this kind of position,” she stated.
TRAMS and the unique sound of its bells have always been part and parcel of the City of Joy. The tram was first introduced in the city in 1873. Back then, a horse-driven carriage was introduced from Sealdah to Armenian Ghat. With time, trams have become a part of the city's heritage. They not only provide the working population with a cheap means of transportation but trams driven by electricity also do not contribute to air pollution in the city.Thanks to Bengali and Hindi cinemas, trams are hot spots where the hero romances his heartthrob. Due to this, trams have come to symbolise Kolkata like no other modern invention.For these reasons, any judicial case involving trams is not a simple one but involves the history, the heritage, the emotions and the very identity of Kolkata.On January 16, a division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya heard a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a group of citizens who have collectively formed a trust known as People United for Better Living in Calcutta (PUBLIC).The PIL has been filed as the petitioners allege that once the state government completes its ongoing process of bituminisation, it will remove the tram and, eventually, sell the tram depots to private players. The petition filed by the PUBLIC alleges that the decision to discard trams was not taken on the basis of any scientific study..Thanks to Bengali and Hindi cinemas, trams are hot spots where the hero romances his heartthrob. Due to this, trams have come to symbolise Kolkata like no other modern invention..The petition further argues, “Kolkata has repeatedly topped the list of global cities threatened by climate change. Data also show that the transport sector is a major contributor to carbon emissions…“Removal of trams is contrary to this professed goal and goes against the fundamental tenets of transport planning in the context of climate change, i.e., zero-emission. Whereas many cities around the world are reviving their tram systems to address the issue of climate change, it is inconceivable as to why the respondent authorities would weed out the tram system in the city of Kolkata when Kolkata is hugely threatened by climate change.”.The missing innings: Addressing parental leave in cricket.The petition cites several examples of cities where trams have been revived, including London and Paris, which are undergoing what the petition calls a “tram renaissance”. Istanbul is another good example of a city where trams have served well.In such a situation, discarding the tram, which is a sustainable mode of transport, is arbitrary and unwise, the petition argues. Short-term monetary benefits cannot be pitted against the long-term health and sustainability of the city. Discarding trams would affect the movement, environment, health and social equity of the citizens of Kolkata, the petition further argues.What happened on the first day of the hearing?On the first day of the hearing on May 8, 2023, the counsel for PUBLIC, Advocate Siddhartha Mitra, had reminded the Bench that the government is celebrating 150 years of the tram in Kolkata.To this, the Bench had reminded everyone present, “Some award has also been given.” The petitioner, while arguing, had stressed the point that the entire exercise of removing the tram network has been done in a “data vacuum”.“Why do you want to do away with it? It is a heritage. Why not replace the carriage?” the Bench had asked with concern. The petitioner had then pointed out the ulterior motive behind the exercise..The petition cites several examples of cities where trams have been revived, including London and Paris, which are undergoing what the petition calls a “tram renaissance”..“What can you do to modernise?” the Bench had asked of the State. “The State is trying hard,” the counsel for the State had responded. He had further stated that he would seek proper instruction and come to the court. The division Bench of the high court, while concluding the hearing and staying the ongoing process of bituminisation, had stated, “We make it clear that further bituminising or removing the tram tracks shall not be done till a decision is taken by this court in this writ petition.”What did the court say on another PIL related to trams which was subsequently tagged?The division Bench of the high court presided over by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and also comprising Justice Ajay Gupta, while hearing a similar PIL in 2022 related to trams, had not only allowed the petitions to be merged with this PIL but had in its Order dated June 21, 2023 observed:.Indian National Congress versus the State of India, RSS, BJP and Ors.“It is an undisputed fact that trams in Kolkata are part of its heritage. The respondents being a welfare State are also to preserve the heritage for the purpose of not only enjoying the same for the present but also to preserve the same for posterity.“When the public of Kolkata is very proud that the Durga Puja festival has been given heritage tag by UNESCO, equally they should be proud to have the tram services restored, maintained and operated efficiently in the city of Kolkata.”In the same Order, it went on to note, “The petitioner had filed an application under the provisions of the Right to Information Act (R.T.I.) seeking for various details and from the reply given by the public information officer it is seen that the total length of the tramway lines in the city of Kolkata was 116.62 kilometers and the tramway line currently used by WBTC is only 33.04 kilometers and trams are operated only in three routes and in twenty routes which has not been operated.” The division Bench of the high court presided over by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and also comprising Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya by its Order dated August 7, 2023 had ordered that an expert committee of 11 members be formed. On the second day of the hearing of the PIL, the Bench had noted with certain anguish:“It is not clear as to why the committee has not met despite the fact that the committee was constituted with the consent of the State after much deliberations and discussions and also after hearing the then learned Advocate General who appeared for the State.”While continuing its earlier restraining Order of restraining, it had adjourned the case..Third day of the hearingOn the third day of the hearing, the advocate of the applicant stated that no meeting had been held by the committee since January 2024. To which the division Bench of the high court presided over by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and also comprising Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya responded, “How can this be so? It is public property… You want to circumvent our Order, do it on our face.” Then the State’s advocate assured the Bench that they would hold meetings on a regular basis pursuant to the direction issue on December 17, 2024.While continuing to restrain the State from further bituminisation and also at the same time to re-bituminise those tracks that have been bituminised despite the restraining Order, the court noted:.Bulldozer action judgment: Supreme Court guards against State overreach.“It is very hard to believe that some miscreants have done the bituminisation on a busy public road under public gaze and that the authorities concerned were oblivious of what was happening.“Since the report shows that there was no direction for bituminisation, we direct that those tram tracks that were illegally bituminised to be restored and the bituminised be removed and a report be filed in this regard supported with photographs on the next hearing date…“The reason for which the court had passed the Order in the writ petition is that trams are a part of the cultural ethos of the city of Kolkata and to our knowledge, no other city in the country trams are being operated. Dismantling and closing down the tram services is an easy task but nonetheless the respondents being the welfare state should also bear in mind to preserve the cultural heritage of the city of Kolkata.“When the government department has constituted a separate wing to preserve heritage buildings, we have failed to understand as to why such thought process is not happening so far as the trams in the city of Kolkata. There are other countries where trams are operated one of which comes to our knowledge is Switzerland and identically trams ply in the middle of the road which was cited as one of the reasons by the Kolkata police that it is resulting in accidents. In fact, this stand taken by the Kolkata police was reiterated by the learned Advocate General on the last hearing date.”.After the Order was passed, Bonani Kakar the President of PUBLIC, while speaking exclusively to The Leaflet, said she was shocked to see that despite the Order of the high court, the bituminisation was not stopped..After the Order was passed, Bonani Kakar the President of PUBLIC, while speaking exclusively to The Leaflet, said she was shocked to see that despite the Order of the high court, the bituminisation was not stopped.The stretch running from Kalighat (where the Chief Minister resides) to Harish Mukherjee Road saw the bituminisation of tram tracks for about one kilometer. This happened between August–September, 2024. The advocate representing the State took the stand that the State was not aware of the fact as to who did this. “It is a sad situation to have to hear this kind of position,” she stated.
