Order No. 15 dt. 28/11/2016
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant along with her husband purchased Two AC 2-tier tickets for journey from Howrah to Berhampur. The date of journey was fixed on 23.10.2013 and return journey on 28.10.2013. On 23.10.2013 the complainant and her husband boarded Yaswantpur Express from Howrah Station at 8.30 p.m. and the train to reach Berhampur at about 5 A.m. on the next date i.e. 24.10.2013. The complainant asked the TT whether the train was reaching in time but the complainant was told by the T.T. that the route had been diverted . The train was not going to Berhampur and the complainant ultimately got down at Rourkela station at 6.15 A.M. on the next day. The T.T. gave false assurance to the complainant that she would be given tickets for reservation from Rourkella onwards journey from Rourkella to Berhampur from whether she could avail of the train for going to Berhampur. The complainant went to meet the Station Master and told her predicament The Station Master advised her to go into Passenger Train which would be reaching Berhampur in the evening . On hearing such schedule time of the train the complainant became annoyed and asked the Station Master to provide a Retiring Room which the Station Master is refused. Ultimately the complainant went to jotel and requested the Station Master to provide a confirm ticket which was turned down by the Station Master while the complainant found that it was not possible for her visit to Gopalpur Sea Beach. The complainant requested the Station Master for arranging the ticket for retuning to Howrah which was also not accommodated by the SM and the complainant had to stay at Rourkella Hotel and on 28.10.2013 the complainant return to Howrah due to such non-cooperation on the part of the Railway Official the complainant filed this case praying for returning the price of the tickets amounting to Rs.2,750/- and interest and also for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and the cost for their stay at Rourkella Hotel amounting ato Rs.4,000/-.
OP Nos.2, 3 and 4 contested the case by filing a w.v. and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that OP 1 is not necessary party as the Chairman, Railway Authority Board is not implementing authority. It was stated that the said Train no.12863 and with other trains diverted via Tata-Nagpur-Vijayawara route due to “Phylin” devastation cyclone which stroke at Gopalpur on sea at Orissa on the very day which the Railway planned not to take any trains via Vadrak, Cuttack, Khurda Road, Vishakhapatnam etc and the water level raised over different Railway Bridges above danger level and accordingly diversion of route had taken place.
The train while reached at Kharagpur over public address system conveyed to the passenger regarding the diversion of the train after coming to know of the said cyclonic weather. The complainant cancelled their programme to visit Gopalpur and stayed at Rourkella if the complainant would have followed announcement she could have got down at Kalaikunda wherefrom announcement was also made. The T.T. helped the complainant and arranged a porter to help the complainant for carrying their luggage. The complainant made wild allegation against the Railway Officials. There was a national alert for storm “Filin”. Since it was a natural calamity of the act of God railway is immune for taking any responsibility as per Section 93 of Railway Act,1980. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above the OPs has prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether there was any deficiency in service of the OPs;
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the claim as prayed for;
Decision with reasons
The complainant who appeared herself argued that she along with her husband wanted to visit to Gopalpur, Orissa and for that purpose booked two AC 2-tier tickets. The date of journey was fixed on 23.10.2013. While the train was in running condition the complainant asked the T.T. as to whether the train would reach Berhampur at 5.00 A.M. The T.T. replied that the train has been diverted and the original route is not being followed . After hearing the said fact the complainant got down at Rourkella and she asked the Railway Officials to provide them with a Retiring Room which Railway officials failed to accommodate. Thereafter the complainant went to near by Hotel and stayed there. After some days returned to Howrah and lodged the complaint to different authorities .But no action was taken for which the complainant filed this case. praying for returning the value of the tickets as well as compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.
The Ld. lawyer for the OPs argued that during the period a national disaster took place with the onset of ‘PHYLIN’ originated in Malayasia, Indonesia etc., with greater impacts on coastal area in Orissa particularly at Gopalpur, the route of the train was diverted and the said diversion was made after informing the passenger through public address system but unfortunately the complainant and her husband ignored the said announcement and availed of the train journey which carried them to Rourkella whereby they got down on their own accord. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. lawyer for the OPs prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submission of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that during that period a storm known as Phylin originated from other states of Asia having the impact on Orissal coastal area and the route through which the train ought to have been passed, the water was running above the danger level under the Bridges and the Railway rightly took the decision to divert the route. The announcement was made through public address system most of the passengers followed the said public address system but the complainant and her husband ignoring the said announcement and wanted to avail of the journey to Rourkela in AC Two-tier coach. Considering such perspective of the case and the compelling circumstances for which the train had to be diverted and accordingly we hold that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the complainant on the contrary. We appreciate the stand taken by the Railway for diversion of the route otherwise there would have been major accident causing loss to both the passengers and railways.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly resulting in dismissal of the case.
Hence, ordered,
that the CC No.370/2014 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
