Railways has to pay Rs 25,000 to a traveller for not informing him about cancelled train

Northern Railway has been asked by the apex consumer commission to pay Rs 25,000 to a man for not informing him about cancellation of a train, terming it as “deficiency in service”.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has asked the Northern Railway to pay the money to Delhi resident Manoj Kumar, who had booked his ticket for journey in February last year but after reaching the station, he came to know that the train had been cancelled for the last few months.

NCDRC’s bench, presided by Justice Ajit Bharihoke, passed the order while dismissing a revision petition field by the railways against Delhi state consumer commission’s order. In its order, the state commission had upheld a district forum’s order, asking the railways to pay the money to Kumar.

More from Economy

Inflation likely to be a big focus area for budget 2024, say sources Explained: Will the Bank of Japan break tradition and raise interest rates?

“The least expected from the railway was to intimate the respondent/complainant about cancellation of running of train on February 13, 2013 in order to save him from unnecessary trouble to visit the railway station to board the train which was cancelled.

“This is gross deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner/opposite party (Northern Railway). Therefore, we do not find any fault with the orders of the foras below in allowing the complaint and awarding the compensation,” the NCDRC said.

The railways had urged that case be remanded back to the forum for decision on merits after obtaining written statement of railways on record. However, NCDRC rejected the plea.

“Despite of 2 ½ month adjournment (for the next date of hearing), the petitioner/opposite party (railways) did not file written statement and even failed to put in appearance on hearing dated January 3, 2014 and this led to ex parte order against the petitioner. “From the aforesaid history of the progress of complaint before the District Forum, order of District Forum proceeding ex parte against petitioner cannot be faulted,” the commission noted.

PTI