In the case of the Union of India vs Amandeep Singh, the Chandigarh Consumer Forum states that refunds for waitlisted were only obtained if they cancelled before 30 minutes of train departure, this rule is not fair and not in the favour of the consumer and result in unnecessary loss.
The order stated “The appellants (Railways) cannot make profit under the garb of their statute ie. on one hand, usurp the fare paid by such a consumer who did not get availability of seat and simultaneously, receiving fare from other successful passenger having confirmation for the same seat,”
According to Rule 7 of the Railway Passengers (Cancellation of Ticket and Refund of Fare) Rules, 1998, waiting list passengers can cancel their tickets thirty minutes prior to the time specified of the train’s departure in order to receive a refund.
Section 49 of Consumer Protection Act 2019: Procedure applicable to State Commission
- (1) The provisions relating to complaints under sections 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39 shall, with such modifications as may be necessary, be applicable to the disposal of complaints by the State Commission.
(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), the State Commission may also declare any terms of contract, which is unfair to any consumer, to be null and void.
While stating this section the bench stated that it is the jurisdiction of Railway Claims Tribunals to deal with these matters and not bar the consumer’s forum jurisdiction.
The bench said “We feel that in the interest of a consumer, the appellants should have curtailed their practice and procedure to charge fare from the persons, who could not get availability of seat or confirmation of seats and later, notwithstanding the fact, whether they get it cancelled or not within the stipulated window of 30 minutes before the scheduled departure of the train.”
“All these aspects ought to have been taken into consideration by the appellants and devise a criteria, which can make the things easier for every citizen of every category to its benefit in true perspective without any harassment and complexities involved therein,” said the Commission
The Railways had claimed that the administration did not promise reserved seats to any consumer. Additionally, in light of the 1998 Regulations, no refund of fare shall be issued on reservation against cancellation (RAC) or waitlisted tickets after thirty minutes before the planned departure of the train. The complainant’s request for a refund was turned down because she did not contact the authorities in a timely manner.
“The Ld. District Commission has rightly observed that had appropriate action been initiated by the opposite parties to redress the genuine grievance of the complainant, there would have been no necessity for the complainant to indulge in the unnecessary litigation. In our considered view, the Ld. District Commission righty allowed the complaint and the present appeal is liable to be dismissed being meritless.” said by state commission while filing the complaint found that the conduct of the railway is not only financial loss but mental agony too.