waiting list and ticketless passengers occupying their reserved seats. They requested the occupants to vacate their reserved seats, but the occupants refused and suggested they find other places to sit.
The parents had boarded the train from Ottapplam, having booked their sleeper class tickets through IRCTC’s official website for Rs 668 . but they couldn’t enjoy their seats. Their son Aditya, boarded the train from Palakkad, with his tickets reserved through the reservation counter of the Ernakulam Town Railway Station for Rs 315. The parents had confirmed lower berths in the S2 coach while Aditya had the upper berth in S6 coach.
As the journey went on, both of their sleeper compartments became increasingly overcrowded with people lying on the floor, under berths and on the side of their seats. They tried to contact the ticket examiner and the Railway Protection Force Personnel, but couldn’t find anyone to help them.
At 8.12PM, Aditya registered a complaint through Railmadad application and RPF Salem Team responded to him through phone assuring to resolve the issue at Tiruppur or Erode Station. Unfortunately, no resolution was provided and the complaint was closed without any action.
After repeated requests and quarrels with the unreserved passengers, the parents, who are senior citizens, got the lower berths for sleeping. Seeing the pain of his parents, Aditya again filed a complaint through the application and got a response assuring the staff would be available at Jolarpettai Junction. However, no action was taken at that station or afterwards.
When the train entered Andhra Pradesh, the overcrowding intensified making it impossible for them to access bathroom facilities. Further, passengers started sleeping under the lower berth of Aditya’s parents which made them feel unsafe and uncomfortable.
The family argued that it was really tough for them to go to the bathroom as people were sleeping on the floor of the sleeper reservation coach. Also, Aditya had a reserved upper berth, but even that was occupied by some ticketless passengers and he got it after repeatedly asking for it. After this, the family filed a consumer complaint on November 30, 2024.
On February 3, 2026, the Palakkadd district consumer commission passed an order in their favour. The consumer commission ordered the Railways to pay the family Rs 50,000 compensation, Rs 25,000 as cost of litigation, all within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which Railways would have to pay Rs.500 as solatium per month or part thereof from the date of the order till the date of final payment.
Keep reading to find out how the family won the case in consumer commission.
Consumer commission order and analysis
A short summary of the judgement is as follows:
Two TTEs were in train from Ernakulam to Erode Junction and from Erode to Katpadi
The Railways said that two ticket checking staff were on the train from Ernakulam to Erode Junction and from Erode to Katpadi. However, the Kanyakumari-Pune Express is not escorted by either RPF or GRP in the Palakkad Division.
The Railways also argued that no complaint with regard to this incident was raised by the family to the concerned authorities at the Palakkad Railway Division.
At 8.12 PM on December 10, 2023, Aditya who was in S6 coach registered a Railmadad complaint with ref No.2023121008205 wherein it was stated that “General Ticket’ passenger were entered in S2 coach, no ticket checker came.”
The Railways claimed that the complaint was immediately forwarded to the Commercial Control and Security branch of Salem Division, that the TTE and RPF attended the S2 coach and removed the unauthorised passengers when the train stopped at Tiruppur and Erode Junction. Since the authority of ticket checkers is restricted with commercial staff, the RPF could not identify the unauthorised passengers.
The rule is that the RPF has to make an immediate due response to address the grievance of the complainant and assist the TTE to remove the unauthorised persons in the compartment.
So, Aditya filed another complaint on Railmadad app at 11.24 PM, saying that the S6 coach is packed with unreserved passengers, causing chaos and disturbing those trying to sleep. He mentioned that the ticket examiner had not come around to check the tickets. The complaint was immediately forwarded to the Commercial Control and Security branch of the Salem Division. The Railways claimed that the TTE and RPF attended the S6 coach and cleared the unreserved passengers at Jolarpett.
The Railways argued that the family had availed the rail service and reached their destination, and that none of the other passengers in the train lodged any complaint regarding the incident as raised by the family. The railways also said the family had filed this complaint one year after the incident. If the alleged incident had caused them so much suffering, they would have filed the complaint earlier.
The Railways thus claimed the family was lodging a complaint so late because they wanted to get monetary benefits from the Railways.
Photographs clicked by the family clearly showed the crowded situation in the coaches
The consumer commission said that the photographs produced Exts.A11 to A14 clearly showed the crowded situation in the coaches.
The consumer commission said: “Even though the opposite parties (Railways) had stated that they had cleared the unreserved passengers in the S2 and S6 coaches, they could not adduce any evidence to prove their contention.”
The consumer commission also said that the Railways did not take any steps to examine the TTE or other staff to prove their contention that they have removed the unauthorised passengers immediately after receiving the complaints in the Rail Madad App.
Thus the consumer commission said that in that situation, the passengers with reserved seats did not have a safe and comfortable journey. The opposite parties (Railways) being the service providers, had to make necessary arrangements to ensure a safe and comfortable journey for the passengers . They failed to ensure this, proving deficiency in service on their part and they are liable to compensate the complainants (the family) for that.
Order
- The consumer commission said that since the family has completed their journey, they are not allowing the prayer to refund the ticket price. However, the family is entitled to get compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties (Railways) and for the mental agony and inconveniences suffered by the complainant.
- The consumer commission directed the Railways to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation and Rs.25,000 as cost of the litigation. The above amounts are to be paid within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs 500 as solatium per month or part thereof from the date of the order till the date of final payment. This ruling was pronounced in open court onFebruary 3, 2026.
aniltikotekar4sme.com 