Railways Ordered To Pay Rs 5,000 After Passenger's RAC Ticket Turned Waitlisted

The Delhi State Consumer Commission has upheld a compensation of Rs 5,000 awarded to a passenger by the District Consumer Commission in 2020 whose ‘reservation against cancellation’ (RAC) reservation became waitlisted after the Railways removed a coach from his train. It found that the passenger was not given timely information about the change, leaving him without enough time to make alternative travel arrangements.

How The Passenger's Ticket Changed

Mr Singh of Uttam Nagar, Delhi had booked a sleeper-class ticket on Simanchal Express in October 2012. His reservation status showed RAC/43. An RAC ticket allows a passenger to travel, but it does not guarantee a confirmed berth. When Singh reached the station on October 31, 2012 to board the train, he found that his reservation had changed to WL/44.

He approached railway staff and the travelling ticket examiner (TTE) for help, but he was informed that a coach had been removed because of a technical problem, which had led to the change in his reservation. With no other arrangement available, Singh travelled standing from Anand Vihar to Katihar Junction. 

The Railways later confirmed that coach SE-1 had been removed by the operating branch and that this had changed his status from RAC/43 to WL/44.

Why The Railways Were Held Responsible

The State Commission noted that the change was caused by the removal of the coach. However, the passenger had not been informed about the change before reaching the station.

The Commission found that Singh learnt about the revised status only after the reservation chart had been prepared. This left him with little opportunity to make alternative travel arrangements. 

The Commission, therefore, held that the Railways had failed to provide proper and timely information. It treated this as a deficiency in service.

The District Consumer Commission had awarded Singh Rs 5,000 on March 11, 2020, for the hardship and mental agony he had experienced. The State Commission found the amount reasonable and upheld the award.

Consumer Commission Have Jurisdiction Over Such Cases

The Railways also argued that the Consumer Commission did not have jurisdiction because the dispute came under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.

The State Commission rejected this argument. It held that Singh’s complaint concerned the way the railway service was provided. Another legal remedy did not prevent a consumer forum from hearing a complaint about deficiency in service.

Why This Order Matters To Passengers

The order does not mean that every passenger whose RAC ticket becomes waitlisted will get Rs 5,000. RAC status itself does not guarantee a confirmed berth.

The key point is that Singh’s reservation changed because of a railway operational decision, and he was not informed in time. Passengers should check their final reservation status before travelling and keep records if a booking changes unexpectedly.

The decision also shows that passengers can approach a consumer commission when they believe a paid service was not provided properly. Compensation will depend on the facts of each case.