Tuesday, October 15, 2013

IRCTC directed to pay Rs 25k for not refunding fare..

Sources: http://railwayjudgments.blogspot.in/2013/10/irctc-directed-to-pay-rs-25000-for-not.html

Courtesy_
Dinamalar ePaper

Also read the related stories

ஐ.ஆர்.சி.டி.சி.,க்கு ரூ.25 ஆயிரம் அபராதம்: டிக்கெட் கட்டணம் தராமல் இழுத்தடிப்பு

பதிவு செய்த நாள்: அக்டோபர் 14, 2013, 22:32 IST

புதுடில்லி: உறுதி செய்யப்படாத ரயில் டிக்கெட் கட்டணத்தை, திருப்பி தராமல் இழுத்தடித்த, இந்திய ரயில்வே உணவு மற்றும் சுற்றுலா கழகத்திற்கு (ஐ.ஆர்.சி.டி.சி.,), 25 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய் அபராதம் விதித்து, டில்லி மாவட்ட நுகர்வோர் கோர்ட் உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது.

உறுதி செய்யப்படாத டிக்கெட்

டில்லியை சேர்ந்த பயணி ஒருவர், ஐ.ஆர்.சி.டி.சி., இணையதளம் மூலம், டிக்கெட் முன்பதிவு செய்துள்ளார். அவருக்கு, உறுதி செய்யப்படாத டிக்கெட் கிடைத்துள்ளது. இதனால், அவர் தன் பயணத்தை, ரத்து செய்துள்ளார். ஐ.ஆர்.சி.டி.சி., இணையதளத்தில் செலுத்திய கட்டணத்தை திருப்பி கேட்ட போது, 'உங்களுக்கு, உறுதி செய்யப்பட்ட டிக்கெட் வழங்கப்பட்டதால், செலுத்திய பணத்தை திருப்பிக் கொடுக்க முடியாது' என, அந்த நிறுவனம் தெரிவித்துள்ளது.

'சார்ட்' தயாரிப்பு

இது குறித்து, தகவல் அறியும் உரிமை சட்டத்தின் கீழ், டிக்கெட் நிலை குறித்து விண்ணப்பித்து, அந்த நபர், தகவல் பெற்றார். அதில், 'சார்ட் தயாரிக்கப்பட்ட நிலையிலும், டிக்கெட் உறுதி செய்யப்படவில்லை' என, குறிப்பிடப்பட்டு இருந்தது. இதையடுத்து, டில்லி மாவட்ட நுகர்வோர் கோர்ட்டை, அந்த நபர் அணுகியுள்ளார்.

பயணிக்கவில்லை

அந்த மனு, நீதிபதி சக்கரவர்த்தி முன், விசாரணைக்கு வந்தது. ஐ.ஆர்.சி.டி.சி., சார்பில் தாக்கல் செய்யப்பட்ட மனுவில், 'அந்த பயணிக்கு, வழங்கப்பட்ட டிக்கெட், உறுதி செய்யப்பட்ட டிக்கெட். ஆனால், அவர் பயணிக்கவில்லை. எனவே, அவருக்கு பணத்தை திருப்பி கொடுக்க இயலாது' என, குறிப்பிடப்படப் பட்டிருந்தது.

இரு தரப்பு கருத்துக்களையும் கேட்ட நீதிபதி, பிறப்பித்த உத்தரவில் கூறியதாவது: பயன்படுத்தாத டிக்கெட்டுக்கு, மூன்றாண்டுகள் ஆகியும், கட்டணம் திருப்பி தரப்படாமல் ரயில்வே நிர்வாகம் இழுத்தடித்துள்ளது. மனுதாரர் தொடர்ந்து மன உளைச்சலுக்கு உள்ளாகியுள்ளது தெரிகிறது. எனவே, சம்பந்தப்பட்ட பயணிக்கு, இழப்பீடாக, 25 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய் வழங்க வேண்டும். இவ்வாறு அந்த உத்தரவில் தெரிவிக்கப்பட்டது.

Courtesy_

Also read the related stories

IRCTC directed to pay Rs 25,000 for not refunding fare

PTI | Oct 14, 2013, 01.01 PM IST

NEW DELHI: IRCTC has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay Rs 25,000 as compensation to a passenger for not refunding fare of his unused wait-listed tickets booked nearly three years ago.

The New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum noted in its order that non-refund of fare of unused tickets after nearly three years of having applied for refund shows "total collapse of the efficiency of Railways".

"In the present case, the Ticket Deposit Receipt was issued on November 12, 2010, for the refund applied on November 12, 2010, and till now, at the time of argument, the complainant has not been returned the fare. This shows the total collapse of the efficiency of Railways for refund of unused tickets.

"The complainant shows he was informed by Railways that there was no seat available as chart has been prepared. The reply (of IRCTC) shows a different story. It states tickets were confirmed after preparation of the chart...

"All this clearly establishes harassment suffered by the complainant along with others due to unfair service of Railways. We hold the opposite party guilty of deficiency and direct to pay compensation of Rs 25,000 to the complainant inclusive of value of the ticket, compensation and litigation expenses," the bench presided by C K Chaturvedi said.

The order came on the complaint of Delhi resident Subrata Bhaumik who said he had booked six tickets under 'Tatkal Seva' on November 2, 2010, for travelling to Delhi, but since he was informed through Railway enquiry that the tickets were not confirmed, he travelled by bus.

When he went to collect the refund, he was informed that his tickets had been confirmed. On filing an RTI application, he came to know that tickets were not confirmed after chart was prepared, he said.

Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation, in its defence, contended that Bhaumik's ticket had been confirmed, but since it was booked under 'Tatkal Seva', refund of fare was not permissible as per rules.

The forum, however, rejected the contention by relying on the RTI reply

Courtesy_

Also read FULL Judgment at: 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI, (DISTT. NEW DELHI), 'M' BLOCK, 1STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110001.

Case No.C.C./564/12, dated: 03-10-2013

In the matter of:

Subrata Bhaumik, 4B/24 (III Floor), Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-110 060 ------ COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

IRCTC Ltd., C/o. General Manager, IRCTC Ltd. 9th Floor, Bank of Baroda Bldg., 16, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110 001 ------ OPPOSITE PARTY

ORDER

President: C.K.Chaturvedi

This complaint is against deficiency of OP in not making prompt payment towards refund on used tickets by the complainant. The TDR  was submitted in 2010.  It is alleged that he had booked the tatkal tickets from an agent on 2.11.2011 for six persons for the train Ranikhet Express from Ranipur to Delhi in sleeper coach.  The date of travel was 3.11.2010.  The ticket was not confirmed and was in waiting list from 25 to 29. He sent a SMS  to Railway Enquiry to know PNR  status.  He got  a reply from his phone from No.139  that no room was available and chart was prepared on 3.11.2010.  At that time he had no option  but had to wait for road transport at night.  He came to Delhi. His mother was also suffered a brain stroke.  He alleged that next day he went to the agent to get the money back as non confirmed tickets, where he was informed that ticket was confirmed.  He filed a TDR to IRCTC and made a complaint to concerned Manager, IRCTC, but  there has not been any communication to him nor refunded the money. Therefore he seeks a compensation, and refund of ticket of Rs.975/-.

The OP in its reply admitted the fact that complainant  booked e-ticket,  through  is an agent of IRCTC in Tatkal kota in train NO.5024 in November 2010.  He applied for refund of TDR on 12.11.2010.  The ticket was not used.  It is stated that as per policy claim of refund is processed by the Zonal Railway  under whose jurisdiction destination station of the train falls.  Accordingly the case was forwarded to Chief Commercial Manager/Refunds, Northern Railway on 22.11.2010 and remainder was sent on 15.4.2011 and the Zonal Chief Commercial Manager repudiated the claim as no refund is admissible on confirmed ticket issued in Tatkal Seva.

We have gone through the rival  case complainant  has filed on record at Annexure 4 along with rejoinder.  This is a RTI report showing that awaiting ticket is not confirmed after the chart.  He also annexed Annexure 5 photo of SMS showing that no room available and the chart prepared,  and other documents of illness of his mother.

We have considered the rival submissions.  In complaint case No.18 this Forum has discussed in details about refund of tickets with in reasonable times while journey is not made.  Similar pleas of respondents of Northern Railway was taken in that case and this Forum repelled the same and observed that IRCTC  is a National Link of Indian Railway and is responsible for refund of ticket in reasonable time.

In the present case the TDR  was issued on 12.11.2010 the refund applied on 12.11.2010 and till now in 2013 at the time of argument the complainant has not been returned the fare.  This shows the total collapse of the efficiency of Railways for refund of unused tickets.  The OP is also taken a false sleep that tickets are not confirmed after chart is prepared.  The complainant shows that he was informed by Railways that  there was no seat available as chart has been prepared.  The reply shows a different story.  It states that the tickets was confirmed  after  the preparation of the chart which complainant was came to know after performing journey by bus.

All this clearly establishes the harassment suffered by the complainant along with others due to a unfair service of railways.  We hold the OP guilty of deficiency and direct to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant which is inclusive of the value of the ticket, compensation for deficiency in service, harassment, inconvenience and litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

(C.K.CHATURVEDI) President

(S.R.CHAUDHARY) Member

(ASHA KUMAR) Member

Sources:  

Also read the related stories

IRCTC to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation for relegation of reservation

PTI

NEW DELHI, NOV. 20: The Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC) has been asked by a consumer forum here to compensate a woman and her son for harassment they underwent because of relegation of their reservation status due to which they could not travel to Mumbai as planned.

The New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum ordered IRCTC to pay them Rs 5,000 and said it was "obvious" that someone else was accommodated ahead of them.

"It is obvious that line was jumped and in place of waiting list 1 and waiting list 2, some other persons were accommodated, leading to him being pushed down. This is certainly unfair treatment to travelling public, who believe in the system of booking introduced by opposite party (IRCTC).

"We hold the IRCTC responsible for this practice leading to harassment and not explaining its position in court. We direct it to pay Rs 5,000 to complainants together, inclusive of litigation charges," the bench headed by forum's President C K Chaturvedi said.

The forum's order came on a complaint by Delhi resident Rakesh Kumar Jain who had booked tickets on the Garib Rath Express for himself and his mother for travelling to Mumbai on January 30, 2010.

Reservation status at the time of booking had showed he had advanced to waiting list (WL) 34 and 35 from WL 117 and 118 and then it had moved up to WL 1 and 2, Jain had said.

At the last minute the status slid down to WL 46 and 47 without any explanation, he had alleged adding his correspondence to IRCTC did not produce any result.

(This article was published on November 20, 2012)

Courtesy_

Also read the related stories

IRCTC fined Rs 10L for selling soft drinks above MRP

PTI

New Delhi, Feb 27: Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC) has been slapped with a fine of Rs 10 lakh by a consumer forum here for selling soft drinks above the maximum retail price (MRP) to two customers.

The New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum imposed "punitive compensation" of Rs 5 lakh each in two separate cases against IRCTC, a subsidiary of Indian Railways, and said being a government corporation, "it is not expected to be deficient in such matters and cannot come down to level of private dealers".

"We have considered the case in the perspective of unfair and restrictive trade practices, by a government company who supply food articles to millions of rail users, who in transit cannot protest or have little choice but to avail services at whatever cost.

"The IRCTC being a government corporation is not expected to be deficient in such matters and cannot come down to level of private dealers," a bench presided by C K Chaturvedi said.

The forum directed IRCTC to deposit a fine of Rs 10 lakh with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority and also awarded compensation of Rs 10,000 each to the two passengers, Delhi residents Sachin Dhiman and Sharnya.

"Keeping in view, the gravity and scale of gain by overcharging in 24x7 Railway operations all over India, we award punitive compensation of Rs five lakh to be deposited by IRCTC with Delhi State Legal Services Authority and we award compensation of Rs 10,000 (each) to complainant(s)," it said.

The two complainants had alleged that a retail outlet of IRCTC had sold each of them a bottle of Maaza having MRP of Rs 12 for Rs 15.

IRCTC, which handles the catering, tourism and online ticketing operations of the railways, was proceeded against ex-parte as no one appeared on its behalf.

Courtesy_

Sources: http://railwayjudgments.blogspot.in/2013/10/irctc-directed-to-pay-rs-25000-for-not.html

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disclaimer

This Blog Spot is meant for publishing landmark judgments pronounced by the Consumer forum, Consumer State Commission, Consumer National Commission, Supreme Court as we collected from the renowned Dailies, Magazines, etc., so as to create an awareness to the general public and also to keep it as a ready reckoner by them. As such the readers may extend their gratitude towards the Original Author as we quoted at the bottom of each Post under the title "Courtesy/Sources". Furthermore, the Blog Authors are no way responsible for the correctness of the materials published herein and the readers may verify the concerned valuable sources.