VIRENDRA SAHAI BISARIA vs NORTHERN RAILWAY

-PETITIONER was the complainant before the District Forum, where he had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent Northern Railway.

UNDISPUTED facts of the case are that the petitioner/complainant along with his three family members, booked seats in second class sleepers for going from Lucknow to Allahabad in Gomati Express, for which reservation tickets were issued in coach number S-1. It was the case of the complainant before the District Forum that when he reached the station he did not find any ''s-1'' coach. He found only A-2 coach attached. Since they were keen to go to Allahabad, they decided to board a compartment of second class and travelled to Allahabad undergoing mental agony and physical pain. At Allahabad they approached the TTE for refund of the ticket but this was not done. It is in these circumstances, a complaint was filed before the District Forum, who after hearing both the parties on merits, dismissed the complaint. An appeal filed before the State Commission, against the order of the District Forum, met the same fate, hence this revision petition before us. We heard the complainant/petitioner in person, who is an Advocate by profession, and perused the material on record. It needs to be clearly stated that there is a concurrent finding of fact returned by both the lower Fora that Coach No. S-1 was attached and the petitioner and family travelled by the same coach.

We have seen the record and there is no disputing the fact that the ''reservation-chart'' for day and in the train in question, shows the ''reservation'' in the name of the petitioner as also his family members.

IT is the case of the respondent Northern Railway that ''s-1'' coach was there on that date being number 14966 and its position was 6th from the Engine. On a complaint filed by the petitioner/complainant before the General Manager, Northern Railway, an internal inquiry was conducted and the report of the inquiry is on record, which also corroborates that on 21. 6. 1996 S-1 and S-2 coaches were there, attached to the train and S-1 also carried a ''reservation chart'' as in the normal practice, outside this coach, showing the reservation in favour of the petitioner and his family. On record, we see no evidence having been led by the petitioner to contradict this finding. In our view, the lower Fora rightly observed that the petitioner being an Advocate, in other words a literate and informed person, would have filed a report of this episode if he did not get a berth against a confirmed seat, (either at Lucknow or at Allahabad Railway Station ). This obviously was not done by the petitioner, which in our view, has rightly been held against the petitioner. In the aforementioned circumstances as also based on material on record, and concurrent finding returned by both the Fora that ''s-1'' coach was there, we have no ground to interfere with the order passed by both the lower fora, in exercise of powers conferred on us under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for the simple reason that no jurisdictional error or illegality has been shown to us by the petitioner. This revision petition has no merits, hence dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.