GENERAL MANAGER, E.C.RAILWAY Vs. AJAY SHANKAR VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNION of India (Railway and others) have preferred the appeal against the order dated 30 -12 -2005 passed by District Forum, Motihari in complaint case No. 71 of 2005.

(2.) THE brief fact of the case is that he got reservation of four berths in Awadh Express (Train No. 5263) for travelling up to Agra on 1 -6 -2004. Its PNR number was 220 - 1589184.He got coach No. 9 berth No. 41 to 44. The complainant along with his family members travelled in this train up to Narkatiyaganj. Thereafter he was informed by the train conductor that they have to vacate this compartment at Gorakhpur and they shall be accommodated in coach No. S1 and S3. The complainant protested that when he got confirmed ticket in one coach without any prior notice why he has been shifted to other coach and his berth has been allotted in two different coaches which will cause physical and mental harassment to him and his family members. It would not be advisable for his family members to travel alone in a different berth. His family consisted ladies and minor children. The coach conductor informed him that coach No. S 1 has two berths for the complainant and his wife and coach No. S2 has another two berths for their minor children. It is further case of the complainant that berth No. 15 in coach No. S2 was RAC berth. This also caused hardship to his minor children. It is further alleged that when he got down at Agra he found that Coach No. S9 was still attached in the said train but without any reason he was forced to change the coach and that also with the above hardship. The complainant after returned on 20 -8 -2004 from Agra made a written complaint to Station Superintendent, Motihari but he did not get any reply. Thereafter he filed the complaint and claimed Rs. 1,90,000/ - for physical and mental harassment. The complainant annexed affidavit along with copy of the reserved ticket along with the complaint petition.

(3.) THE Railway appeared and filed rejoinder. It admitted that originally the complainant was allotted berth No. 41 to 44 in coach No. S9. The complainant did not make any protest at the earliest stage in the complaint register maintained with the guard or conductor of the train. The train was versatile: Those coaches were inter -connected; therefore, it was possible for him to go from one coach to another without any problem. As per rule the berth was not available from the original station Motihari itself in this coach and he was told in the beginning that he will have to change the coach at the earliest because it has been reserved in the name of other persons from before. It was also the case of the Railway that the claim of the complainant is belated and inflated. He did not have any mental or physical sufferance. He travelled on reserved berth. The active chart of the train of that date has been produced on behalf of the Assistant Commercial Manger of Samastipur Division and on its basis it was submitted that the change in the berth was announced at the earliest on the mike. This change was made due to some technical problem. The other passengers changed their berths as per new arrangement in the very beginning but the complainant protested and he did not change the berth at the beginning. Therefore, he was asked that he may change the berth at Gorakhpur because thereafter it is possible that this coach may be de -attached from the train due to technical fault. As such, due to technical fault this change was made in the compartment and berth of the complainant for which the Railway is not liable under this Act. It was beyond the control of the Railway and the change was made for the safety of the passengers. After hearing both the parties the District Forum held that Railway could not produce any satisfactory evidence including affidavit in support of its contention whereas the complainant has been able to show that he was to change the coach and berth under compulsion and he was asked to travel in two coaches. This resulted into bifurcation of his family members in two coaches. This has caused him physical and mental torture. He was not informed at the earliest station at Motihari but in the way of travel he was asked to change the coach, which must have serious problem to the complainant travelling with family. No proof has been brought on record that there was some defect in coach No. S9 and it was de -attached from the train but it is the contention of the complainant that this coach was remained attached with the train till Agra. This fact has also not been denied by the Railway. In Coach No 2 he was allotted two berths for his minor children and that also one berth was No. 15 and another was 38. The result was that his two children were separated from his parents and they were also not permitted to travel together but at different places. This show that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Railway and it has caused physical and mental harassment to the complainant. It has been further held by the District Forum that Railway cannot take protection of the fact that the complainant failed to lodge this protest in the complaint register maintained by the coach conductor or guard of the train. In practice such complaint register is never produced on demand by the passengers besides it was not possible for the complainant to move in the train leaving other members of the family to obtain this register from guard or train attendant. Considering this fact the District Forum allowed compensation of Rs. 40,000/ - to the complainant.