The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has decided to examine whether a train passenger, despite buying a confirmed ticket or RAC (reservation against cancellation), can be penalised with the collection of full fare if he or she is unable to produce the ticket on demand by the TTE.

A bench headed by Justice R.K. Agrawal, while deciding to examine the question of law, stayed the operation of an order passed by the state consumer commission, Chandigarh, after Northern Railway petitioned the apex consumer court to quash the order, which had ruled that such a levy amounted to deficiency in services.

The railways rushed to the national forum as the order would otherwise have opened the floodgates with thousands of passengers, fined every day in the country, taking on the railways.

The original complainant before the state consumer commission, Birendra Kumar Paswan, had on August 25, 2019, booked two tickets on the Dibrugarh Town-New Delhi Rajdhani Express — one in his own name and another in his mother’s name — and paid Rs 4,820. They boarded at Katihar Junction and travelled to New Delhi.

During the journey, when they were asked to show their tickets by the TTE, they failed to produce them despite having been given sufficient time. The TTE then imposed a penalty of Rs 5,150.

According to railway rules, if a passenger fails to produce the original ticket, a penalty is imposed under Section 55 of the Railways Act, 1989, read with a ministry of railways circular dated 30.08.1996.

Paswan filed a complaint before the district forum, Chandigarh, alleging that the penalty imposed on him amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the railways.

The district forum directed the railways:

i) To refund the amount of Rs 4,820 to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum with effect from the date of journey till the realisation of the refund.

• To pay an amount of Rs 1,000 to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony and harassment.
• To pay Rs 1,000 to the complainant as costs of litigation.

It was further directed that if these directions were not complied with “within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, the payments of the amounts mentioned at Sr. No. i) and ii) above with interest @ 12 p.a. from the date of order, till realisation.”

The order of the district forum, dated 04.04.2022, was upheld by the state dispute redressal commission, Chandigarh, on June 9, 2022. The railways then appealed to the NCDRC.

Appearing for the railways, advocate Shoumendu Mukherji assailed the concurrent findings of the two forums and cited Section 55 of the Railways Act, 1989, which says: “No person shall enter or remain in any carriage on a railway for the purpose of travelling therein as a passenger unless he has with him a proper pass or ticket or obtained the permission of a railway servant authorised in this behalf for such travel.”

This is reiterated in Section 347 of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual Volume I, Chapter III.

Mukherji also referred to the railway ministry circular of 30.08.1996, which says that people found travelling without proper authority are treated as travelling without tickets, and are charged the fare along with a penalty.

This provision also applies to passengers who have confirmed reservations but fail to produce the authority for travel, including tickets, either on account of their being lost or misplaced.

It further says: “…In respect of those passengers whose names are appearing in the chart having confirmed/ RAC reservations and are unable to produce travel authority tickets, they should be charged full fare including reservation charges without realising any penalty.”

Mukherji argued that according to the rules, the passenger has to produce the original ticket when directed by the official concerned, but the complainant had failed to do so. The penalty imposed on him was therefore justified and there was neither any irregularity nor deficiency in service, nor unfair trade practice.

Prima facie, the NCDRC found substance in the argument while staying the impugned orders and passed the following directions: “Issue notice on the Revision Petition as also on the Interim Applications, returnable on 08.05.2023. List on 08.05.2023. Till then the operation of the impugned Order dated 09.06.2022, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh as also the Order dated 04.04.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, UT Chandigarh shall remain stayed.”