Consumer Court orders Railways to pay ₹20,000 compensation after passengers denied seats despite confirmed tickets

The Bhojpur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently directed the Railways to pay ₹20,000 compensation to passengers who were forced to travel standing despite holding confirmed reserved train tickets [Ravi Shanker Pandey v. North Central Railway & Ors.]

The complaint arose after four passengers travelling from Vindhyachal to Ara on the LTT Patna Express found their confirmed berths occupied by other persons when they boarded the train.

A coram of Krishna Pratap Singh (President) and Kamal Kishore Singh (Member) held that the passengers suffered “mental, physical and economical harassment” due to the Railways’ failure to provide them their allotted berths despite confirmed reservations.

“The complainant tried to approach the Railway Department through several ways, but the petitioner, along with the other three did not get their seats in the B4 coach, Train no. 13202 LTT Patna Exp.. It is cristal [sic] clear that the petitioner, along with three other friends, suffered mental, physical and economical harassment and it constitutes a deficiency of service by the O.P. no. 1 (North Central Railway) and 3 (Ministry of Railways Railway Board)., hence the complainant is entitled to get their grievances,” said the Commission.

It thus directed North Central Railway and the Ministry of Railways (Railway Board) to refund the booking amount of ₹1,876.80 with 8 per cent annual interest and pay ₹20,000 compensation along with ₹15,000 towards litigation costs within 60 days.

According to the complaint, when the passengers boarded the train after a delay of nearly one hour, they found their allotted seats occupied by certain persons who introduced themselves as railway employees.

Despite requesting them to vacate the berths and seeking assistance from railway authorities, the passengers were allegedly forced to complete the journey standing. Complaints lodged through Railway Seva and Rail Min also yielded no action.

Claiming deficiency in service and harassment, the complainant approached the Commission.

However, the case was contested by North Central Railway and the Ministry of Railways (Rail Board), which questioned the maintainability of the case and argued that the dispute related to law and order issues falling within the jurisdiction of the Government Railway Police and not the Railway authorities.

They further contended that there was no deficiency in service and that action had already been taken on the complaint.

However, after examining the evidence on record, the Commission found that the complainant and his companions had suffered harassment and held that the Railways were deficient in service.

Accordingly, it directed the Railways to pay the compensation amount.

It further stated that if the amount was not paid within the stipulated period, the complainant would be entitled to recover it with 10 per cent annual interest.

Advocate VN Sachchu appeared for the complainant.

Advocate Sanjay Kumar appeared for North Central Railway and the Ministry of Railways (Rail Board).

Advocate Pratima Singh appeared for East Central Railway.

[Read Order]