E-Paper
Railways ordered to compensate passenger ₹25,000 over toilet issues: Report
The complainant, Murthy, faced issues when using the toilets during his journey on the Tirumala Express from Tirupati to Visakhapatnam.
The district consumer commission in Andhra Pradesh's Visakhapatnam has directed South Central Railway (SCR) to compensate a passenger ₹25,000 due to “issues” he and his family faced during their journey on the Tirumala Express, The Times of India reported on Wednesday.
The compensation addresses the “physical and mental distress experienced by the passenger and his family,” who reported suffering from a lack of water and non-functional air conditioning in the train's toilets.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (Visakhapatnam) ruled that since the railways collect fares with a commitment to a safe and comfortable journey, they are obligated to provide basic amenities like water in toilets, air conditioning, and a proper environment.
What was the complaint?
On June 5, 2023, V Murthy, 55, and his family boarded the train at Tirupati. He told The Times of India that he had booked four 3AC tickets on the Tirumala Express from Tirupati to Visakhapatnam, aiming for a comfortable and stress-free journey.
Murthy, from Vizag City, said that they faced issues when using the toilets due to inadequate water supply, lack of air conditioning, and an unhygienic environment in the coach.
The family was initially assigned berths in the B-7 coach, but Murthy later received a message from the railway authorities stating that they had been moved to the 3E coach instead of 3A.
He mentioned that, despite lodging a complaint about the inconvenience with the relevant office at Duvvada, no action was taken to resolve the issue, resulting in difficulties for his family throughout their journey.
However, the railways refuted these claims, arguing that Murthy had made false allegations to exploit the public exchequer and noting that he and his family arrived safely using railway services.
The commission reviewed the railways' defence and noted that the railways (the opposite party) admitted that upon receiving Murthy’s complaint, railway staff inspected the issue and found that a technical issue caused an air-lock, which obstructed the water flow.
This acknowledgement by the railways indicated that the train had been stationed at the platform without verifying basic amenities.
The commission then ordered the railways to compensate Murthy ₹25,000 for the inconvenience during the journey from Tirupati to Duvvada (Vizag district), along with an additional ₹5,000 to cover legal costs.
