Department of Railways, through:
Divisional Manager,
Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur
Petitioner
1. Subhash Chand Jasuja
S/o of Hari
Kishan Dass,
R/o Fazilaka
2. Mrs. Subhash Jasuja,
w/o Shri Subhash
Chand Jasuja
R/o Fazilaka
3. Vinod Kumar Beri,
S/o Shri Kewal Krishan
Beri,R/o Fazilaka
4. Mrs. Padma Beri
W/o Shri Vinod Kumar Beri,R/o Fazilka
Respondents
Dated the 9th October, 2006:
O R D E R
M.B.Shah, J.
President:
By order dated 26.5.1998 the District Forum, Ferozepur,
directed the Petitioner to compensate the Complainants by refunding Rs.1,240/-
(Rs.600 plus Rs.640) being the difference of railway fare, and also pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to
each of the Complainants, i.e. in all Rs.40,000/- and Rs.1,000/- as cost of
litigation. That order was confirmed in Appeal No. 1180 of 1988 by the State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab by order dated 19.5.2000. Hence, this Revision Petition is filed by the
Union of India, Department of Railways.
Facts:
For
appreciating the contentions,
we would refer to the facts which would reveal the deficiency in
service on the part of the Railways. It is contended that the Complainants
Nos.1 and 3 are Advocates and the Complainants Nos. 2 and 4 are their wives.
They made a programme during December, 1993 to visit
Bombay, Goa, etc. On 8.11.1993 the Complainants
purchased 1st Class tickets for going from Ferozepur
to Vasco on 22.12.1993. The booking officers at the Ferozepur
confirmed the first class reservation from Ferozepur
to Delhi by the Punjab Mail and informed them that message would be passed on
to Delhi Office for onward reservation from Delhi to Vasco by the Goa Express. Thereafter, on 22.11.1993, the Complainant
visited the office of the railway booking agency at Ferozepur
where he was informed that there was no first class compartment in Train No.
2702 Goa Express. It is pointed out that the railway
booking agency at Ferozepur got the information from
Delhi on 15.11.1993.
Immediately, on 22.11.1993,
the Complainant requested for issuing the tickets for IInd
AC from Ferozepur to Vasco. The booking officers charged excess
fare and issued confirmed Tickets from Ferozepur to
Delhi by the Punjab Mail and assured that, for further journey, message will be
transmitted to Delhi Office.
Again, for verification, the
Complainant visited the Ferozepur office where, to
his shock, he was intimated that the Complainants were placed in waiting list.
On 22.12.1993 the
Complainants reached the Ferozepur Railway Station to
undertake their journey. But, they were surprised and shocked to know that
their names did not figure in the reservation list for IInd
AC and figured in the list of passengers in First Class.
Anyhow, the Complainants
reached the New Delhi Railway Station on 23.12.1993 for going to Vasco (Goa). At the New Delhi Railway Station as per the
reservation chart the Complainant were again shocked to know that their names
figured in waiting list at Sl. No. 22 to 25. Not only
this, they found that there was a first class compartment attached to the
train. On inquiry it was revealed that the first class compartment goes upto Mirja. On inquiry it was
also revealed that several persons whose names figured in the reservation chart
have booked their seats subsequently to that of the Complainants. Complainants
were not accommodated in the said train.
They were required to stay at
Contentions
of the parties:
In
the written version filed by the Petitioners, it is contended that the Railways
had destroyed the record after six months. It is also contended that under the
Railways Act such complaint is not maintainable, and, that the Complainants
have not approached the Consumer Fora with clean
hands. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner further contended that
the Complainants were aware about their status of reservation as their tickets
were not confirmed. Confirmation of the
tickets depend upon
the availability of seats. Therefore,
they could not have any grievance.
They were wait listed
at serial Nos. 22 to 25.
Hence the Petitioner cannot be held to be liable for the damages
suffered by the Complainant due to non-confirmation of their seats.
Findings:
In
our view, from the contentions and the facts as found by the District Forum,
there is deficiency in service on the part of the Department of Railways. The said deficiencies are as under:
(a). The
booking clerk was negligent in not informing the Complainants on 8.11.1993
itself that there was no first class compartment. Otherwise, the Complainants
could have booked their seats in the IInd AC on
8.11.1993, because, there was a gap of 45 days from the date of booking of
tickets and the date of commencement of the journey, and confirmed tickets
would have been issued on 8.11.1993.
(b). As per the written statement of the
Railways, the railway booking agency at Ferozepur got
the information from the Delhi Office on 15.11.1993 about the non availability
of first class compartment but the railway officials were negligent in not
communicating the said information to the Complainants till 22.11.1993, i.e.
when the Complainants visited the office of the booking agency at Ferozepur. The precious time of the Complainants had been
lost. Had the Complainants been informed about the non-availability of
reservation by 15.11.1993, they would have booked their tickets on 15.11.1993
and their chances of getting confirmed reservation was maximum.
(c). The booking officials were negligent
even on 22.11.1993 that in spite of conversion of first class ticket to IInd AC
from Ferozepur to New Delhi by the
Punjab Mail, they failed to delete the names of the Complainants from the first
class reservation and failed to put their names in the list of IInd AC and for the
said deficiency on the part of the Railways the Complainants had to travel in
the first class in the biting cold without bedding.
(d). The
booking officials were negligent in not informing the Complainants that there
was first class compartment upto Miraj. If the said information was given, the Complainants
might have chosen to reserve their births upto Miraj and might have traveled from Miraj
to Vacso in the class whichever was available.
(e). The Complainants have alleged that the
certain persons have been accommodated/given confirmed reservation who booked
their seats after 22.11.1993 or whose names figured below the Complainants were
accommodated on one pretext or the other.
They further stated that the position of reservation is exclusively
within the knowledge of the Railway Authorities and onus lies upon them to show
who and how many person were given reservation on and
after 22.11.1993. The position of reservation on the relevant date has not been
brought on record by the Railway authorities.
Considering the aforesaid
aspects, in our view, the impugned order of the State Commission, confirming the order passed by
the District Forum, does not call for any interference. In the result, the Revision Petition is
dismissed. There shall be no order as to
costs.
Sd/-
....
...J.
(M.B.SHAH)
Sd/-
.
.
(RAJYALAKSHMI RAO)