Discrimination was alleged on the part of Railways between the wait-listed passengers who have purchased e-tickets through the internet and the wait- listed passengers who have purchased tickets in the physical form from the Railway Reservation Counters.
It was contended that while the wait-listed passengers holding e-tickets are prohibited from boarding the train, the wait-listed passengers holding tickets in the physical form are entitled to board the train and take a chance of occupying any seats/berths available owing to 'no-show' of the passengers in whose name the confirmed booking exists.
Railways while denying the allegation contended that even the wait-listed passengers holding tickets in the physical form are not entitled to board the train. Infact, unreserved tickets for sleeper and three tier classes can be obtained and persons holding such tickets can approach the Onboard Ticket Checking Staff who can allow them to board the train subject to availability of accommodation and on payment of necessary charges and to the said extent a wait-listed passenger holding ticket in the physical form can board a train subject to availability of accommodation but e-ticket wait-listed passenger cannot travel.
On the basis of submissions made, it was observed that the wait-listed ticket in the physical form, as distinct from e-ticket which is automatically cancelled, continues to exist, even if not confirmed on preparation of the "final chart". Due to this, the passenger holding ticket in the physical form can board the train and take a chance to occupy any seat / berth remaining available owing to 'no-show' and such passenger can however still be de- boarded if no seat / berth is still available.
Merely because passenger holding a ticket in the physical form is entitled to take such a chance would not make out a case for discrimination. This situation has emerged from the difference in the nature of e-ticket and ticket in the physical form.
Accordingly, a direction was given to the Railways to devise ways and means for preventing the above practice. It was also given suggested that an option be given to the passengers purchasing e-ticket, not to have their tickets cancelled automatically at the time of preparation of the final chart before departure of the train and if they so desire, to take a chance by going to the Railway Station and avail of the seats / berths of the passengers holding reservation who fail to show up. In doing so, the waitlist can be followed.*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 15th July, 2014
W.P.(C) 3825/2013
VIBHAS KUMAR JHA
VIBHAS KUMAR JHA
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
CORAM:Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India alleges
discrimination by the respondent Railways between the wait-listed
passengers who have purchased e-tickets through the internet and the wait-
listed passengers who have purchased tickets in the physical form from the
Reservation Counters of the respondent Railways. It is contended that while
the wait-listed passengers holding e-tickets are prohibited from boarding the
train, the wait-listed passengers holding tickets in the physical form are
entitled to board the train and take a chance of occupying any seats / berths
available owing to „no-show‟ of the passengers in whose name the
confirmed booking exists.
of2.
Attributing the said discrimination to Rule 2.11.1 d & e
Commercial Circular No.36 of 2011 dated 7th July, 2011 and titled
“Introduction of e-ticketing and ticketing through mobile phone on Web
Portal of Indian Railways” issued by the Railway Board and which prohibits
fully wait-listed passengers holding e-tickets from boarding the train and for
automatic cancellation of such tickets and refund of the amount received
therefor to the account of the user, relief of, declaration of the same as ultra
vires and quashing of the same besides a direction for allowing the wait-
listed passengers holding e-ticket to also so board the train, is sought.
3.
Notice of the petition was issued and counter affidavit has been filed
by the respondent Railways, to which rejoinder has been filed by the
petitioner. We have heard the counsels for the parties and have also perused
the material on record. We may record that though the petition is long-
winded, without much clarity, but the aforesaid is the crux thereof.
4.
The respondent Railways in the counter affidavit has denied any such
discrimination and has rather contended that even the wait-listed passengers
holding tickets in the physical form are not entitled to board the train. It is
explained that unreserved tickets for sleeper and three tier classes can be
obtained and persons holding such tickets can approach the Onboard Ticket
extent a wait-listed passenger holding ticket in the physical form can boardChecking Staff who can allow them to board the train subject to availability
of accommodation and on payment of necessary charges and to the said
a train subject to availability of accommodation but e-ticket wait-listed
passenger cannot travel.
5.
Inspite of our repeated asking, the counsel for the petitioner was
unable to show to us any Rule / Regulation or provision which entitles a
wait-listed passenger holding ticket in the physical form to so board the
train. Section 155 of The Railways Act, 1989 prohibits any passenger from
entering a compartment wherein no berth or seat has been reserved for his
use and provides for his removal and punishment for the same. The same
does not make any distinction between a passenger holding e-ticket and a
passenger holding ticket in the physical form. Once the counsel for the
petitioner is unable to show that a wait-listed passenger holding ticket in the
physical form is entitled to so board the train, the question of the wait-listed
passenger holding e-ticket being discriminated, owing to the prohibition
contained in the impugned Circular from boarding the train, does not arise.
6.
However notwithstanding the aforesaid, what emerges from the
reading of the pleadings is that while fully wait-listed e-ticket, upon being
though also not confirmed, is required to be presented at the Reservationnot confirmed, is automatically cancelled on preparation of the “final chart”
before the departure time of train, the wait-listed ticket in the physical form
Counter of the respondent Railways for cancellation. Thus, the wait-listed
ticket in the physical form, as distinct from e-ticket which is automatically
cancelled, continues to exist, even if not confirmed on preparation of the
“final chart”. The passenger holding ticket in the physical form is thus able
to board the train and take a chance to occupy any seat / berth remaining
available owing to „no-show‟ as aforesaid; he / she will however be de-
boarded if no seat / berth is still available. Such a passenger is thus taking a
risk / chance of being de-boarded at a distant station unless of course the
train has an unreserved compartment and the passenger opts to travel in the
same.
7.
In our opinion, the mere fact that the passenger holding a ticket in the
physical form is entitled to take such a chance even though not entitled
under the Rules & Regulations to do so, would not make out a case for
discrimination. Such possibility has emerged from the difference in the
nature of e-ticket and ticket in the physical form. No case of discrimination
can be said to have been made out.
the petitioner through the medium of Right to Information Act, 2005 that no8.
During the hearing we were also informed from the data collected by
refund is obtained of a large number of wait-listed tickets issued in the
physical form. Therefrom it is sought to be pointed out that the number of
wait-listed passengers holding tickets in the physical form so boarding the
train and travelling is large. It is argued that the passengers holding e-tickets
are deprived of such an opportunity.
9. Such a possibility, in our view, cannot be ruled out.
10. The counsel for the respondent Railways has also argued that one of
the objectives of introducing e-ticketing is to do away with the menace of
blocking tickets to make the seat / berth subsequently available to wait-
listed passengers.
11.
To the said extent, the wait-listed passengers holding e-ticket are
certainly at a disadvantage.
12.
We thus direct the respondent Railways to, within a period of six
months from today, consider the matter in the perspective discussed above
and to devise ways and means for preventing the practise, if any in vogue of
the touts / unscrupulous elements for their own gain blocking the seats /
berths by making reservation therefor in bogus names and then making such
physical form and occupy the seats / berths of the bogus reservation. Oneseats / berths available to bona fide passengers willing to pay premium, by
allowing them to board the train on the basis of wait-listed tickets in
suggestion which comes to our mind is, to give an option to passengers
purchasing e-ticket, to not have their tickets cancelled automatically at the
time of preparation of the final chart before departure of the train and to if
so desire take a chance by going to the Railway Station and availing of the
seats / berths of the passengers holding reservation and who fail to show up.
In doing so, the waitlist can be followed and the practise aforesaid curtailed.
13.
With the aforesaid direction the petition is disposed of.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE
JULY 15, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment