Consumer Forum directs IRCTCL to pay compensation

Visakhapatnam: District Consumer Forum-1 has directed the opposite parties-MD of Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited (IRCTCL), Chief Commercial Manager (refunds), Central Railway, Chief Commercial Manager (refunds), East Coast Railway Bhubaneswar and Divisional Railway Manager, Waltair Division to pay Rs 4,000 towards compensation for the mental agony suffered and Rs 2,000 as legal costs to the complainant Rajiv Sadhanala of NTPC Simhadri, Visakhapatnam, in two months. Failing which amount should be paid with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of order till the date of realisation.

As per the facts of the case, Rajiv Sadhanala booked a confirmed ticket from Visakhapatnam to Pune for Rs 6,492 for October 13, 2014 by train No. 02882 BBS-Pune Premium Express train which was diverted via Sambalpur due to the Hudhud devastation. The passenger could not board the train as it did not touch the boarding station and soon after he got the information on the night of October 12, he applied for TDR for which he received confirmation too. However, the railway authorities rejected the TDR request through an e-mail on November 20 stating that the complainant had travelled. Though notices were issued to the opposite parties, they were not responded. Meanwhile, the complainant obtained confirmation through RTI that the train did not arrive at Vizag station on that day and filed a petition with the Forum-1.

The counter filed by the first Opposite party IRCTCL admitting the booking of tickets, pleaded that the IRCTL will only provide access to the Railway Passenger Reservation System through its server and internet connectivity to book tickets. The refund of ticket fare will be decided by the railway authorities concerned under whom the destination station of the train falls. The refund was repudiated with a reason ‘that the passenger has travelled as per the chart’ by the railways concerned and there was no deficiency in service on its part. The second opposite party called absent while the third one filed a counter which was adopted by the fourth opposite party. Admitting the diversion of the train due to Hudhud cyclone, the counter said that a letter was sent to the Chief Commercial Manager, Mumbai to examine the refund of the fare at their end and a copy was also sent to the complainant. Both parties filed evidence affidavits.

Forum-1 President C V Surya Bhaskaram and Member K V R Maheswari after perusing the entire case record, observed that the opposite parties have admitted the diversion of the train on October 13, 2014. The refund of the ticket fare to the complainant was repudiated with the reason ‘Passenger travelled as per the chart’. It also noticed that the opposite parties meanwhile, sent a mail on May 16, 2016 stating that Rs 6,470 has been credited to the account of the complainant. Finding fault with the railway authorities for refunding the ticket fare only after the petitioner had approached the Forum, the Forum-1 awarded compensation and costs considering it as ‘unfair trade practice’.