Thiruvananthapuram Consumer Commission Holds Railways Liable For Failing To Inform Passenger Of Revised Departure Time
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, comprising President P.V. Jayarajan and Members Preetha G. Nair and Viju V.R., held Southern Railway liable for deficiency in service for failing to inform passengers about the rescheduled departure time of a train. The Commission observed that passengers are entitled to timely and quality services and cannot be...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, comprising President P.V. Jayarajan and Members Preetha G. Nair and Viju V.R., held Southern Railway liable for deficiency in service for failing to inform passengers about the rescheduled departure time of a train.
The Commission observed that passengers are entitled to timely and quality services and cannot be expected to suffer due to administrative lapses.
Facts:
The complainant, Prasanthakumar P., booked online train tickets through the IRCTC Rail Connect website for himself, his family and a friend's family, comprising a total of 10 passengers, to visit the Mookambika Temple in November 2019. While the onward journey was completed without any issue, the complainant reached Mangaluru Railway Station on November 3, 2019, for the return journey to Thiruvananthapuram.
After checking the train timing on the 'Where Is My Train' application, he expected the train to arrive at around 5:40 PM. However, upon making enquiries at the station, he was informed that the train had already departed at 2:50 PM, nearly three hours earlier than the scheduled time, without any prior intimation to the passengers.
After the railway authorities failed to arrange any alternative travel, the complainant and the other passengers purchased general class tickets on another train by spending an additional ₹2,200 to return home.
Alleging that Southern Railway had failed to notify passengers about the revised departure schedule, thereby causing financial loss, inconvenience and mental agony, the complainant approached the Consumer Commission seeking refund of the additional expenses, compensation and litigation costs.
Contentions of the Opposite parties:
The Railways contended that the timing change was due to the annual shift from the monsoon to the non-monsoon timetable and that passengers had been advised to check the revised schedule. It argued that the complainant relied on the private 'Where Is My Train' app instead of the official NTES platform and, therefore, there was no deficiency in service.
Observations and Decision:
The Commission found that Southern Railway failed to produce any evidence to establish that passengers had been informed about the revised departure time of the train. While the Railways claimed that passengers were advised to check the non-monsoon timetable and that such information was printed on reservation tickets and communicated online, no proof was placed on record. The Commission observed that passengers are entitled to timely and quality services and should not be left at the mercy of administrative lapses.
The Commission further held that the Railways must provide valid reasons for an early departure and ensure timely intimation to passengers. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that the Railways' failure to notify the complainant about the revised departure time amounted to deficiency in service.
Allowing the complaint, the Commission directed the opposite parties, jointly and severally, to refund ₹3,784 to the complainant along with 6% interest from November 3, 2019. It also awarded ₹25,000 as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and ₹3,000 towards litigation costs.
The Commission directed that the amounts be paid within one month from receipt of the order, failing which all amounts except the litigation costs would carry 9% interest per annum from the date of default until realisation.
Case Title: Prasanthakumar P. v. Southern Railway
Case No: DC/565/CC/471/2019