Orissa

Cuttak

CC/125/2018

Bijoy Ketan Mohanty - Complainant(s)

Versus

Divisional Manager,East Coast Railway - Opp.Party(s)

B K Nayak

28 Sep 2020

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK

  C.C No.125/2018

1.            Bijoy Ketan Mohanty,

Regd. District Judge,Judges Colony,

Plot No.821/4,Sector-10,C.D.A,P.O:Markat Nagar,

Town/District:-Cuttack-753014

 

2.       Sri Gunanidhi Patra,

Retired Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Plot No.1/D/74,Sector-11,C.D.A,P.O:Markat Nagar,

Town/District:-Cuttack-753014

 

3.            Sri B.K.Routray,

Retired Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Plot No.7-D/1323,

Sector-9,C.D.A,P.O:Markat Nagar,

Town/District:-Cuttack-753014

 

  4.          Sri Satyabadi Behera,

S/O: Chaitanya Behera,Retd.

Stamp Reporter & Oath Commissioner,

Orissa High Court,Plot No.7-D/311,

Sector-9,C.D.A,P.O:Markat Nagar,

Town/District:-Cuttack-753014

 

             Vrs.

 

 

1.         The Divisional Railway Manager,

East Coast Railway,Khurda Division,

At/PO:Jatni,Dis:Khurda.

 

2.        The Station Manager,

Cuttack Railway Station,

At/PO:Station Square,Cuttak.                                             … Opp. Parties.

                 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,LL.B. President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    19.12.2018

Date of Order:  28.09.2020

 

For the complainants.  :    Rashmi Prava Mohapatra,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.1& 2.       :     Mr. C.Nayak,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Dhruba Chran Barik,President.

                The complainants have filed this case alleging therein deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and seeking appropriate relief against them in terms of their prayer in the consumer complaint.

1. The facts of the complainant’s case stated in brief are that the complainants are highly educated and experienced persons.  Complainant no.1 is a senior retired judicial officer and the faculty member of Odisha Judicial Academy,Cuttack and complainant no.2 & 3 are  retired Chief Judicial Magistrates and now practicing in Odisa High Court.  The complainant No.4 is a retired stamp reporter and oath Commissioner,Odisha High Court,Cuttack.

The complainants and their family members including lady members and a child decided to proceed on a pleasure trip from Cuttack to Darjeeling and accordingly booked railway tickets in train no.12551 (Yasobantapur-Kamakhya Express) well in advance.The photo copies of the confirmed railway tickets have been filed and marked as Annexure-1 series.On the scheduled date on 29.4.18, all of them came to Cuttack Railway Station and waited in the plat form at the exact location where the display board was indicating about the halting of coach no.B4/ B2 which they were to board.On arrival of the train, to their utter surprise, it was found that their coach No.B4/B2 were parking at the extreme end of the train which is far away from the place where they were waiting near the display board.Having no other alternative they were forced to enter the coaches in front of them and took much hardship to carry the luggages to the required coaches despite protest of the coach attendants.There was also exchange of hot words between the complainants and co-passengers while passing through the coaches in between.It was a very painful experience for the complainants to go from one end to other end of the train along with old lady members and a child carrying luggage bags with them.Some of them were about to faint.According to them what had happened on 29.4.18 in the train was nothing but sheer negligence coupled with deficiency in service by the O.Ps.

On the same day, complainant no.1 lodged a complaint through his BSNL Mobile No.9437234378(Web Complaints Portal) against the O.Ps and on that basis complaint No.W/EO/IUR/000356238 dt.30.4.18 was registered and the fact of registration was intimated to the complainant no.1.It was also intimated that the inconvenience caused to the complainant and others was deeply regretted.The photo copy of such registered complaint has been filed and marked as Annexure-2.Subsequently on 1.5.2018 the railway authority intimated complainant no.1 that his registered complaint has been attended to and it is now closed.Photo copy of the said intimation about the closure of his complaint has been filed and marked as Annexure-3. Nothing more was done by O.Ps to alleviate the sufferings of the complainants. Therefore, it is stated that causing inconvenience and hardship to the complainants by the railway staff, is tantamount to deficiency of service by the O.Ps for which they liable to pay adequate compensation.

Complainants have therefore prayed that the O.Ps are jointly and severally liable and may be directed to pay compensation of a sum of Rs.50,000/- only to the complainants, to pay Rs.30,000/- to them towards the mental agony and harassment caused by the O.Ps and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards litigation expenses together with other reliefs if any,which are just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The O.Ps entered appearance and contested the case.  In their joint written version they have admitted the contentions of the complainants in the complaint petition but have materially traversed the fact that there was wrong placement of coach no.B4/B2 which has caused undue harassment and mental agony to the old senior citizen and their family members.  More particularly it is stated that one Surya Kanta Debata, one outsourced staff has reported that the composition of the train compartment on the scheduled date as received from the Central Enquiry,Khurda Road at 9.40 A.M was ENG-WLR-B1 to B8-PE-B9-A1 to A4-H1-B10 to B12 WLLR but as per the complainants, the coach position was like Eng-A1 to A4-H1-PC-B1 to B12 which does not tally with the report of Surya Kanta Debata.  It is further stated that the coach position as has been revealed by the complainants in their complaint petition in comparison with the enquiry report submitted by one R.N.Pani CCI/Ctc  on 18.4.2019 is incorrect.  As such it is pleaded that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps.

The further stand of the O.Ps was that the coach indication boards are not the only source of information in respect of placement of coaches at the platform.There are facilities of face to face enquiry counter and frequent public announcement system for awareness of the passengers. It is also contended that there was no similar complaint made by the co-passengers on that date of journey or subsequent thereto.It is therefore prayed that the above consumer complaint is baseless and fabricated and may out rightly be dismissed.

3. We have gone through the case records and annexures attached with it.  We have also heard the learned counsels from both the sides.

The short question that falls for consideration in this case is whether the negligence of O.Ps have caused deficiency of service to all the complainants and others because of wrong placement of coach nos.B2/B4 of train no.12551(Yasobantapur–Kamakhya Express) on 29.4.18 at Cuttack Railway Station which have caused much hardship and serious mental agony to the complainant and their family members as such making the O.,Ps liable for compensation and grant other reliefs as claimed? The bone of contention between the parties is the wrong placement of the above coaches in the Railway Platform, Cuttack on 29.4.2018.The complainants have categorically confirmed this fact but the O.Ps have emphatically denied the same.In this connection the learned advocate for the O.Ps has submitted that as per the report of Surya Kanta Debata an out sourced staff that the train composition as received from Central Enquiry,Khurda Road at 9.40 A.M. hours was ENG-WLR-B1 to B8-PE-B9-A1 to A4-H1-B10 to B12 WLLR but as per the complainants, the coach position was like Eng-A1 to A4-H1-PC-B1 to B12 which does not tally with each other.As such it is stated that the description of the coach position given by the complainants is incorrect.Further submission of the learned advocate for the O.Ps was that the coach position as has been given by the complainants in their complaint in comparison to the enquiry report submitted by Mr. R.N.Pani,CC-1,Ctc on 18.4.18 is not correct.In that view of the matter, it is stated that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps in any manner.The learned advocate for the complainant has taken serious exception to it, on the ground that not a single scrap of paper has been filed to this effect by the O.Ps nor any reason assigned for non-production of the same.In such an event, it is imperative that adverseinference has to be drawn against the O.Ps for their failure to submit the relevant documents.The bald statement of the O.Ps unsupported by relevant documents cannot just be taken into consideration to substantiate their stand.

Further the report of R.N.Pani, the railway staff dt.18.4.19 is of no avail when the occurrence took place on 29.4.18 and the consumer complaint has been filed on 20.12.18.Even if it is held that no similar complaint from co-passengers have been filed, this by itself cannot be a ground to entirely disbelieve the complainants case in absence of production of relevant and authentic documents by the O.Ps.It is beyond any stretch of imagination that the complainants who are highly qualified, experienced and responsible officers cannot make wrong and baseless complaints without just cause against the O.Ps simply to put them to harassment.As such it is held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps so far as wrong placement of coaches no.B2/B4 of Yosabantapur Kamakhya Express on 29.4.2018 is concerned which has caused serious mental agony and harassment to the senior citizens like complainants and their family members. Hence ordered;

                                                                                ORDER

The O.Ps are jointly and severally liable for the deficiency of service caused to the complainants as stated above.They are directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainants towards harassment and mental agony caused to them together with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to them in the interest of justice.

This order shall take effect within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble President in the Open Court on this the 28^th   day of September,2020 under the seal and signature of this Commission.

                                                                                    Sri D.C.Barik.

                                                                                       President.

 

                                                                                    Smt. Sarmistha Nath

                                                                                         Member(W)