New Delhi: In the first of its ownership who will jerk the train and happy the general public who took the delay in the train as part of life, the Supreme Court ordered the train to pay compensation of Rs 30,000 to a man who missed a flight from Jammu to Srinagar The Ajmer-Jammu Express reaches its goal of four hours late.
Judge M R Shah and Aniruddha Bose tied accountability on the train to run a delayed train.
It is said that if the train cannot explain why the train reaches its late goal of causing discomfort for passengers, it will be responsible for compensating them if they submit a service complaint deficiency before a consumer forum.
SC said the passenger time was very valuable and someone had to be responsible for the delay in the train.
“These are competition days and accountability.
If public transportation must survive and compete with private players, they must improve their system and culture.
Citizens / passengers cannot be at the mercy of the authorities / administration.
One must accept responsibility, “He said.
Judge Shah and Bose enforced the same command from the district, state and national consumer forum which provided compensation of Rs 30,000 with 9% interest to Sanjay Shukla, which with his family missed 12 flights from Jammu to Srinagar because the train was scheduled to reach Jammu 8.10 in June 11 2016 has reviewed the last stop for almost four hours at 12 noon, leaving the family without the opportunity to make it on time to the airport Jammu which is quite far from the station.
The family must arrange a taxi to travel from Jammu to Srinagar at a cost of R 15,000 and pay Rs 10,000 for lodging in Srinagar.
The District Consumer Forum, Alwar, has surprised the North Western train by ordering it to return the money to Shukla, the costs incurred for taxi rates and lodging and also pay an additional RS 5,000 for the cost of mental and litigation suffering.
Forum decisions are enforced by the US Consumer Return Commission and the National Commission.
The train then appealed the NCDRC decision in SC.
Additional Selikitor General Aishwarya Bhati argued that considering that it thought the rule of 114 and ruled 115 from the fostering tariff for the Indian Railroad Conference Association No.
26 Part I (Volume-I), there will be no train obligation to pay compensation for the delay in the train.
But, the bench is not in the mood to accept the argument given the chronicity of delay in running the train in India.
The train cannot be a slowcoach, said the Supreme Court
