RailEnquiry

NAGPUR: The Nagpur bench of Bombay high court has dismissed the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a city consumer rights activist against the Indian Railways seeking direction to deposit the entire amount lying with the railways with the Prime Minister Relief Fund (PMRF), since discount in fares to the passengers who travelled in high capacity coaches was not passed over to them.Last year, AV Prabhune of Nagpur, filed a PIL arguing that on February 26, 2008, while presenting the budget, the railway minister had stated that discount in fares to all passengers travelling in high capacity coaches shall be given.According to the petitioner, despite the said position and despite issuance of commercial circular on March 20, 2008 effective from April 1, 2008, the same was not implemented by the railways in the country.Due to this default, around 60.87 lakh passengers in three zones were deprived of such discount nor any arrangement for refund of the amount on account of discount was made.Thus, according to him, the said amount cannot be retained by the Indian Railways and it was required to refund to the passengers or should be transferred to the PMRF along with penalty of Rs one crore or 5 per cent interest on such amount.Prabhune then argued that the implementation has not been made by the officers and, therefore, they should be held guilty and recovery should be made from their salaries.

Prabhune pointed out his own example and contended that he was refunded Rs 39 because he had travelled once from Nagpur to Delhi in a high capacity coach. He had to fight for about 18 months to get refund. According to him, around 66 lakh passengers have been similarly deprived of the discount.

On the contrary, railways countered the claim made by the petitioner and claimed that railways did take all steps for implementation of the circular issued in 2008.

The railway administration said individual passengers after the completion of their journeys had the option of claiming refund under the refund rules by sending original tickets to the chief commercial manager (refund) of journey or by producing these tickets after completion of the journey at the destination station. The passengers were duly informed of this fact by audio visuals through messages which was shown in bold caption in reservation chart and by announcing through public announcement system.

Railways also claimed that necessary arrangements were made in the software of display on the reservation chart that such passengers could take refund of the difference of the fare at the destination station.

The court dismissed the PIL saying, "Railways followed all the guidelines issued on subject from time to time. There is no failure in implementation of these instructions."