Overcrowding In Reserved Coach Prevented Passengers From Accessing Confirmed Seats: Palakkad Consumer Commission Holds Railways Liable

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Palakkad, comprising Sri. Vinay Menon V. (President), Smt. Vidya A. (Member), and Sri. Krishnankutty N.K. (Member), held the Indian Railways liable for deficiency in service after finding that passengers with confirmed reservations found their seats occupied by unauthorized and ticketless passengers in the sleeper coaches. The Commission observed that the Railways, being a service provider, is duty-bound to ensure a safe and comfortable journey for passengers who have paid for confirmed reservations. Facts of the Case The complainants, including two senior citizens and their son, had booked sleeper class tickets on the Kanyakumari–Pune Express for travel from Ottappalam/Palakkad to Tirupati on December 10, 2023. However, upon boarding the train, they found that their confirmed seats had been occupied by unreserved and ticketless passengers. The sleeper coach was severely overcrowded, with passengers sitting and sleeping on the floor and under the berths. The complainants attempted to locate the Ticket Examiner (TTE) and Railway Protection Force (RPF) personnel but were unable to find any. The third complainant then lodged complaints through the Rail Madad application, but despite assurances from railway authorities, no effective action was taken for a considerable period. As the journey progressed, the overcrowding intensified, with passengers lying on the floor and beneath the lower berths, making it extremely difficult for the complainants to access the washrooms. The complainants alleged that the overcrowding continued as the train proceeded through Tamil Nadu and towards Andhra Pradesh. The complainants therefore approached the Consumer Commission seeking refund of the ₹983 ticket cost, ₹75,000 as compensation for deficiency in service, ₹25,000 for mental agony, and ₹15,000 as litigation costs. Arguments of the Opposite Parties The Railways contended that the complaint was bad for misjoinder of parties, arguing that the Ministry of Indian Railways had been unnecessarily impleaded. The Railways submitted that TTEs and RPF personnel attended the coaches at Tiruppur, Erode and Jolarpettai stations after receiving the Rail Madad complaints and removed unauthorized passengers. They further argued that the complaint was filed almost one year after the incident, suggesting that the complainants had approached the Commission only to obtain monetary benefits. Observations of the Commission The Commission rejected the contention that the Ministry of Railways was an unnecessary party, observing that since the complaint related to deficiencies in railway services, the Ministry could legitimately be made a party to the proceedings. The Commission noted that the complainants had produced tickets, Rail Madad complaint screenshots, and photographs showing severe overcrowding in the sleeper coaches. The photographs clearly showed passengers lying on the floor and under the berths, making it impossible for passengers with confirmed reservations to travel comfortably. The Commission also noted that the Railways failed to produce any evidence or examine railway staff such as the TTEs to substantiate their claim that unauthorized passengers were promptly removed. The Commission noted that in such overcrowded conditions passengers who booked tickets could not have a safe and comfortable journey and that the Railways, being service providers, were bound to ensure proper arrangements for passengers. Their failure to do so amounted to deficiency in service. Decision The Commission held that the railway authorities failed to ensure a safe and comfortable journey for passengers holding confirmed reservations, which amounted to deficiency in service. However, since the complainants had completed their journey, the Commission declined to order refund of the ticket fare. The complaint was partly allowed, and the Commission directed the railway authorities to pay ₹50,000 as compensation and ₹25,000 as litigation costs to the complainants. The amounts must be paid within 45 days, failing which the opposite parties will be liable to pay ₹500 per month as solatium until the date of payment. Case Title: Parthasarathi T & Ors. v. Ministry of Indian Railways & Ors. Case No.: DC/563/CC/529/2024 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Overcrowding In Reserved Coach Prevented Passengers From Accessing Confirmed Seats: Palakkad Consumer Commission Holds Railways Liable

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags