PER JUSTICE J.M. MALIK 1. Counsel for the parties present. Arguments heard. On 20.06.2010, the complainant/petitioner Sh. K.G. Mohanan and his son were going to Surat for the son’s interview. The petitioner booked tickets from Thiruvananthapuram Central to Mumbai CST train and obtained RAC status in S3 coach in Cape Mumbai Express. The complainant and his son occupied seat Nos. 63 & 64 placed at both ends of the berth at the initial stage. However, when the train arrived at Thiruvalla Railway Station, the TTE allotted the seat No. 64, occupied by the son of the complainant, to another passenger, who had boarded the train from Quilon junction. The complainant alleges that his son was removed from his seat and they both were compelled to sit on one seat. 2. Complaint was filed before the District Forum and thereafter an appeal before the State Commission. Both the Fora below have dismissed the complaint and appeal respectively filed by the petitioner. 3. We have heard the counsel for the petitioner. He has invited our attention towards his written notes starting from the start of this file in page marked as A wherein relevant rule has been quoted, it reads as follows:- “The passengers whose names figure under the RAC are provided reserved sitting accommodation initially and are likely to get berths becoming vacant due to last minute cancellation of reservation of passengers not turning up in time before the departure of the train.” 4. The ticket of the son of the complainant was not a confirmed ticket. We are of the opinion that the TTE acted in accordance with the said rule. 5. Further, the counsel for the petitioner submits that how two persons can sit on one seat, it will create anomalous situation. We see no merit in all these arguments. The petitioner himself had opted for RAC tickets, which were not confirmed. He took the risk of his own accord. Both the Fora have already denied relief to the petitioner. He should not have filed this Revision Petition. There is no allegation of any ulterior motive against any person. The Consumer Fora is not like a game of Russian Roulette. It is not a lottery. No costs. Dismissed. | 
