Dy. Chief Comercial Manager, Eastern Railway & anr.      --- Petitioners
                                        Versus
Dr. K.K. Sharma & others                                                --- Respondents

BEFORE:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suhas C.Sen, President, Hon'ble Mr. 
Justice C.L.Chaudhry, Member, Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.K.Mehra, Member, 
Mrs. Rajyalakshmi Rao, Member, Mr. B.K.Taimni, Member.

PER. JUSTICE SUHAS C.SEN, J.

         The complainants are the University teachers who went to Calcutta for academic purpose. They were to return from Calcutta on 11.10.1995. On 12.9.1995, they purchased tickets for their return journey from Calcutta to New Delhi. However, the tickets were purchased from Shimla - No. 888957 (for 4 persons) and 888958 (for 2 persons). Telegrams were sent by Railway authorities of Shimla to Railway authorities of Howrah for reservation on the date of purchase of tickets. Reminders were sent to Howrah Railway Station on 16.9.1995 and 19.9.1995 for reservation. No response was received from Howrah Railway authorities. 

              The complainants went to Calcutta and thereafter made enquiries at Howrah Railway Station on 4.10.1995. Unfortunately, they were told by the Howrah Railway authorities that they had no information about the reservation of berths or the tickets bought by the complainants. Thereafter the complainants on three consecutive days went to the Howrah Railway Station but the Railway authorities could not tell them anything about the status of reservation of the tickets purchased by them. The Complainants on 8.10.1995 succeeded in contacting the D.G.M., Howrah Railway Station. It was discovered that the telegraphic information and reminders about the purchase of tickets and request for reservation sent from Shimla were received at Howrah Railway Station. 

                However, no action was taken by the Railway authorities for reservation in spite of the reminders. There is no dispute that the complainants purchased tickets for return journey from Howrah to New Delhi on 12.9.1995, more than a month earlier than the scheduled date of journey from Calcutta on 11.10.1995. No reason was given why reservation was not made on the tickets. The result was that they had to overstay for one day in Calcutta. No reservation was available for any train from Howrah to Calcutta for the next few days due to Puja rush. The Complainants had to travel to Delhi from Calcutta by air. Thereafter the complainants have lodged a claim of Rs. 4,25,000/- as compensation on the ground of financial loss caused for non-reservation of tickets, mental torture, loss on account of forced air travel and loss on account of local travelling and also overstay in Calcutta. 

           The State Commission held that the existence of remedy provided by Section 13 and 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 did not take away the jurisdiction of the Consumer Courts to decide the question of deficiency of service. 

          It was held by the State Commission that for deficiency of service as well as the claims arising out of mental torture, loss on account of forced overstay in Calcutta and loss on account of forced air travel, etc., could not be claimed from Railway Tribunal. The jurisdiction of that Tribunal was very limited. 

        We are in agreement with the view expressed by the State Commission. Consumer Courts cannot supplant the jurisdiction of the Railway Tribunal or any other judicial or quasi judicial body but can supplement the jurisdiction of these bodies in appropriate cases. It provides an additional remedy to a consumer. The next point is that purchase of a ticket did not give a right to reservation to the complainants. There cannot be any dispute that the passenger is not entitled to get reservation as soon as he purchases a ticket but it is equally true that the railways cannot decline to make reservation arbitrarily. The complainants have sent telegrams for reservation to Howrah Railway Station through the Shimla Railway authorities. Three telegrams were sent from the Shimla Railway Office. The Railway authorities have not produced any proof to establish that reservation was done strictly on priority basis. There must be some reason for not giving reservation to the complainants who had purchased the tickets on 12.9.1995, even before reservation opened for 11.10.1995. The Railway authority has not given any explanation in this regard. Moreover, the telegrams which were sent were not replied to. Dereliction of duty and deficiency in service cannot be disputed.

        It was seriously contended before us on behalf of the Railway authorities that reservation is not given as a matter of right. That may be true. But the Railways have to act reasonably and not arbitrarily. We fail to understand why Howrah authorities could not say that there was a big rush and tickets were issued strictly on the basis of a priority list prepared. Those who had applied earlier got reservation earlier. The petitioners reservation could not be considered because his application came too late. That apart the petitioner sent two reminders by telegram through Shimla Railway authority. There is no explanation why no response was sent to any of these telegrams regretting inability to provide reservation. It was argued before us that the telegrams had not reached Howrah Station for which the postal department must bear responsibility. It is hardly believable that all the three telegrams sent by Railways from Shimla got lost. It was found from a fact by the State Commission that the telegrams had reached Howrah Station in due course. The Railway authorities explained that there was a big pressure on reservation because of heavy rush from Calcutta during Puja holidays. But why the petitioners' application for reservation was not considered and why the reminders sent by Petitioners at Shimla went unanswered has not been explained.

              Having considered all the facts of the case, the Revision Petition is dismissed. We are of the view that order of the State Commission does not call for any interference. This application is dismissed.