Indian Railways - COMPLAINT AGAINST DISCRIMINATORY REFUND POLICY OF INDIAN RAILWAYS

COMPLAINT AGAINST DISCRIMINATORY REFUND POLICY OF INDIAN RAILWAYS
BACKGROUND & FACTS OF THE CASE
I am a resident of Gondia, Maharashtra, and a frequent railway passenger who has been using Indian Railways services for decades. This complaint concerns a deeply troubling and discriminatory refund policy that violates basic principles of equity, consumer protection, and natural justice.
I had booked a reservation ticket with PNR number ********** for * family members for journey from Jhansi to Gondia on Train No. ***** (Gondwana Express) dated **st May ****. The booking was done through the standard PRS counter ticket booking process, which Indian Railways allows from any railway station across the country for any journey anywhere in India.
My family had planned a comprehensive journey from Amritsar to Gondia via Jhansi. For this purpose, they had a separate ticket for travel from Amritsar to Jhansi on Sachkhand Express. This was not a connecting ticket or through journey ticket, but two completely separate bookings. The Sachkhand Express was scheduled to arrive at Jhansi with sufficient *-hour buffer time before the departure of onward Train No. ***** from Jhansi to Gondia. This planning was deliberate to ensure comfortable connection between the two trains.
The journey commenced as planned on **st May ****. Sachkhand Express departed Amritsar on time at *:** AM. However, after **:** PM, the train got diverted due to operational reasons beyond passenger control. This diversion caused an unprecedented delay of over * hours to the original schedule. What was supposed to be a comfortable *-hour layover at Jhansi became an impossible connection.
Realizing the gravity of the situation and understanding that my family would miss the Jhansi to Gondia train, I took immediate action to cancel the unutilized portion of the journey. I cancelled the Jhansi-Gondia ticket through the IRCTC mobile app at **:** hours (*:** PM), which was exactly * hours before the scheduled departure of Train No. ***** from Jhansi. This cancellation was done in full compliance with Indian Railways' own rules that permit digital cancellation through the IRCTC app.
Given the impossible situation created by the unexpected delay, my family made the practical decision to abandon their journey at New Delhi Railway station. They could not continue to Jhansi as they would miss the onward connection anyway. At New Delhi, they found themselves with a cancelled ticket for the Jhansi-Gondia journey and sought to collect the legitimate refund for this completely unutilized journey segment.
My son, who was carrying the original physical ticket as required by railway procedures, presented it at New Delhi Reservation Counter No. * (Pahadganj side) at **:** hours (*:** PM) on **st May ****. He formally requested processing of the refund for the cancelled and completely unutilized journey.
To our absolute shock and dismay, the reservation clerk categorically and unreasonably refused to process the refund. The clerk's stated reason was that the refund could only be collected from Jhansi railway station - specifically the original boarding point of the cancelled journey. This refusal was particularly frustrating and illogical because the same integrated railway system had readily accepted and processed the digital cancellation through their official app just hours earlier, but suddenly claimed complete inability to process the corresponding refund from the same integrated computer system.
The matter was escalated to Railway Board which subsequently provided the official position stating: "After cancellation of PRS counter ticket through Mobile app, passengers can get their refund from journey starting Station (Boarding Point) by surrendering counter ticket in original as per railway extant rule."
This response confirmed that Indian Railways has a deliberate policy of restricting refunds to boarding stations only, despite allowing bookings from anywhere and cancellations through digital platforms from anywhere.
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF DISCRIMINATORY POLICY
VIOLATION OF EQUITY PRINCIPLE
The most glaring issue with this policy is its fundamental violation of the equity principle. Indian Railways operates on a completely contradictory dual standard:
Booking Policy: Any passenger can visit any PRS counter at any railway station anywhere in India and book a ticket for any journey between any two stations. There are no geographical restrictions. A person in Kanyakumari can book a ticket from Kashmir to Kerala. A resident of Mumbai can book tickets from Delhi to Kolkata. This liberal policy exists because the railway computer system is integrated and connected across all locations.
Refund Policy: The same passenger who could book from anywhere is suddenly restricted to collect refund only from the boarding station. The same integrated computer system that processed booking from any location is claimed to be incapable of processing refund from any location.
This arbitrary distinction lacks any logical basis. If the railway computer system is sophisticated enough to handle booking transactions from any location to any destination, the same system should be equally capable of processing refund transactions from any location.
The question that Indian Railways cannot answer satisfactorily is: If the railway computer system can process bookings from anywhere, why cannot the same system process refunds from anywhere?
ARBITRARY AND UNREASONABLE RESTRICTION
Railway's own digital infrastructure proves that location-independent transactions are not only technically feasible but are actively implemented for revenue collection. The same infrastructure that accepts bookings from any counter and cancellations from any mobile device suddenly becomes "geographically restricted" when it comes to refund processing.
This arbitrary restriction creates artificial hardship without serving any legitimate administrative purpose. The rule appears designed to discourage refunds rather than facilitate genuine passenger needs.
Consider the practical implications: A passenger books a ticket from Station A for a journey from Station B to Station C. Due to unforeseen circumstances (like train delays, medical emergencies, natural calamities), the passenger cannot reach Station B and needs to cancel the journey. Under the current policy, this passenger must somehow reach Station B specifically to collect the refund, even if Station B is hundreds of kilometers away from where the passenger is stranded.
This requirement of special travel to collect refund completely defeats the purpose of providing refund facility. In many cases, the cost of reaching the boarding station may exceed the refund amount itself, making the refund practically worthless.
INCONSISTENCY IN DIGITAL-PHYSICAL INTEGRATION
Indian Railways proudly promotes digital integration and encourages passengers to use digital platforms. The IRCTC app allows cancellation from anywhere in the world at any time. The same app shows real-time train information, seat availability, and booking status from anywhere.
However, when it comes to refund processing, Railways suddenly denies the same digital-physical integration. They accept digital cancellation but refuse digital-physical refund processing. They maintain integrated booking systems but claim segregated refund systems.
This selective application of technology creates discriminatory treatment and appears designed to benefit the railways financially while inconveniencing passengers.
VIOLATION OF CONSUMER PROTECTION PRINCIPLES
The policy violates several consumer protection principles:
Creating Unreasonable Terms: The policy creates terms and conditions that are inherently unfair and unreasonable. No rational consumer would expect different geographical restrictions for booking versus refund when using the same integrated railway system.
Financial Loss to Consumers: By imposing additional travel costs to collect refunds, the policy directly causes financial loss to consumers. These additional costs are not disclosed at the time of booking and constitute hidden charges.
Deficiency in Service: Maintaining illogical and burdensome procedures when simpler alternatives are technically feasible constitutes clear deficiency in service.
CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL VIOLATIONS
ARTICLE ** VIOLATION (RIGHT TO EQUALITY)
The policy violates Article ** of the Indian Constitution which guarantees equality before law. The policy creates an arbitrary classification between booking procedures (liberal) and refund procedures (restrictive) without any rational basis.
The Supreme Court has consistently held that any classification must be based on intelligible differentia and must have a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved. This refund policy fails both tests:
There is no intelligible differentia between booking and refund transactions when both use the same computer system and infrastructure.
There is no rational nexus between restricting refund locations and any legitimate administrative objective.
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT VIOLATIONS
The policy violates multiple provisions of the Consumer Protection Act:
Unfair Trade Practices: Creating artificial barriers to refund collection constitutes unfair trade practice.
Deficiency in Service: Refusing to provide refund through available infrastructure when technically feasible constitutes deficiency in service.
Restrictive Trade Practice: Imposing unreasonable conditions that limit consumer options constitutes restrictive trade practice.
VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE
The policy violates principles of natural justice by:
Creating unreasonable restrictions without proportionate benefit
Imposing procedures that are inherently unfair and burdensome
Discriminating between similar transactions without justification
DETAILED RELIEF SOUGHT
IMMEDIATE RELIEF
Process refund of Rs. *,*** for PNR ********** from any PRS counter upon surrender of original ticket. This relief is essential to address the immediate injustice caused by the discriminatory policy.
POLICY REVIEW AND REFORM
Review and completely modify the discriminatory refund policy to align with booking policy. Allow refunds from any PRS counter across India, just as bookings are allowed from any PRS counter.
SYSTEMIC CHANGES
Issue clear, unambiguous instructions to all PRS counters across India regarding uniform policy for counter ticket refunds. Ensure that all railway staff are properly trained to implement the reformed policy.
Train all customer service personnel to understand that geographical restrictions applicable to one service cannot be arbitrarily applied to another service without justification.
COMPENSATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Provide compensation for additional costs incurred due to arbitrary policy implementation. This includes travel costs, opportunity costs, and harassment caused by the illogical policy.
Establish accountability mechanisms to prevent such discriminatory policies in future.
CONCLUSION AND URGENT APPEAL
Indian Railways, as a public service provider, cannot operate with two contradictory standards - liberal for revenue collection (booking from anywhere) and restrictive for refund processing (only from boarding station). This dual approach lacks any rational basis and causes unnecessary hardship to passengers.
The railway system is a national asset built with public money and should serve public interest. Policies that create artificial barriers to legitimate passenger services violate this fundamental principle.
The matter requires urgent intervention to ensure uniform, reasonable, and consumer-friendly policies across all railway operations. The current policy not only violates legal and constitutional principles but also damages the reputation and credibility of Indian Railways as a modern, passenger-friendly service provider.
I respectfully urge immediate action to correct this systemic discrimination and prevent similar injustices to other passengers in future.
Respectfully submitted,
Sudhirkumar Bhagtani
Date: **/**/****
Place: Gondia, Maharashtra