ORDER Rajyalakshmi Rao, Member— This revision petition is filed by the General Manager, Northern Railway and Others aggrieved by the order dated 8.9.2006 in appeal No. 373/2006 passed by the State Commission, New Delhi confirming the order passed by the District Forum, North, Tis Hazari, Delhi on 24.1.2005 in complaint No. 270/2006 filed by the complainant, Shalini Kapoor. 2. In the present case complainant respondent-Shalini Kapoor purchased a railway ticket, PNR No. 240-2021628 dated 15.5.2004 for A.C. Chair Car from New Delhi Railway Station to Kanpur Centre by Gomati Express for a sum of Rs. 445. Gomti Express was late by 5-1/2 to 6 hours and as the travel to be undertaken was urgent she purchased another ticket to travel by Rajdhani Express on the very same day and left immediately. In the process, she could not return the previous ticket and after completing the journey through Rajdhani Express, she surrendered the unused ticket for refund of Rs. 445 on 16.5.2004 at Allahabad Railway Station. The concerned Manager at Allahabad Railway Station gave a receipt No. 162288 dated 16.5.2004 and assured her that she will get the refund within 90 days as per rules. After waiting for 90 days she sent reminders on 21.10.2004 and again on 15.4.2005 but she did not receive any reply or the refund. 3. She claimed for the harassment, tension and costs of litigation in the District Forum, Delhi and was awarded compensation of Rs. 7,000 and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation. During the pendency of the complaint the amount of ticket was refunded by the petitioner. Petitioner’s appeal was dismissed by the State Commission at the admission stage, after hearing the Learned Counsel for Railways on the ground that she is entitled for an amount of compensation for deficiency in service. 4. Aggrieved by the said order Railways raised the following issues: (a) That the jurisdiction of the Consumer forum is specifically barred by the latest Central Enactment i.e. the Railway Claim Tribunal Act, 1987 and the said relevant sections under that Act were not appreciated by the lower fora. (b) The respondent should have surrendered the ticket at New Delhi Station itself within six hours after the scheduled departure of the train which she did not do. (b) The respondent should have surrendered the ticket at New Delhi Station itself within six hours after the scheduled departure of the train which she did not do. (c) She failed to send an application in the prescribed form to CCM (Refund Allahabad justifying her claim along with TDR within 90 days from the date of journey as required by “Refund Rules” and that failure on her part made her ineligible for refund of ticket. (d) Petitioners refunded respondent the entire money and that respondent should be obliged for kind act of railway and instead compensation and costs were levied on the petitioners which are bad in law. 5. Learned Counsel for the Railways prayed for dismissing the complaint with cost of proceedings. 6. Heard the Learned Counsel at length. At the stage of hearing this petition refund rules have been shown to us for the first time and the relevant portion is extracted as given below: “For your convenience, Indian Railways have drawn up customer friendly refund rules. What are the prescribed time limits? 1. Where the ticket issuing and journey commencing stations are the same and in cases where they are different (like return/onward ticket), the ticket should be surrendered at the journey commencing station within the following time limits: Distance of your journey Upto 200 kms. 201 to 500 kms. Over 500 kms. Time limit for cancellation (After the scheduled departure of the train) 3 hours. 6 hours. 12 hours. 2. If the ticket has been issued for travel from some other station, refund can be obtained at the ticket issuing station before the train departs. 3. Refund can also be obtained from a station other than the ticket issuing and journey commencing stations. In such cases, the ticket should be surrendered during working hours, before the preparation of Reservation Chart. Refund will be admissible subject to verification. For trains departing between 21.00 hours and 6.00 hours, you can get a refund either within the prescribed time limits or within for hours of opening of the Reservation Office, whichever is later. What about refunds after the prescribed time limits? If you have not cancelled the tickets within the prescribed time limits, you can approach the Deputy Station Superintendent (Commercial) Station Manager or Chief Reservation Supervisor of nominated stations. What about refunds after the prescribed time limits? If you have not cancelled the tickets within the prescribed time limits, you can approach the Deputy Station Superintendent (Commercial) Station Manager or Chief Reservation Supervisor of nominated stations. They are authorised to grant refunds on tickets issued from their stations by condoning the delay in surrendering the tickets for cancellation. You must also satisfy the Station Manager that your ticket is not used. Suppose I am unable to approach the concerned authorities, what do I do? In such cases, you must obtain a Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) from the nearest major station within 30 days from the date of scheduled travel. You must then submit an application in the prescribed form to the Chief Commercial Manager (Refunds) of the Zonal Railway to which the Ticket Deposit Receipt issuing station belongs. The application should be accompanied by the passenger foil of the TDR. This application must be submitted within 90 days from the date of your journey. Your refund will be sent to you by a Station Pay Order (to be encashed at station) or Money Order or Crossed Cheque.” 7. The above rules actually state right at the beginning that for the convenience of the consumers, Indian Railways have drawn these customer friendly refund rules. However, it reveals that to get a refund of Rs. 445, there are so many hassles that the passenger has to go through to get their rightful refund. 8. First on the question of jurisdiction, we are clearly of the opinion that where the issue is of one of the deficiency in service, the Consumer Protection Act comes into play irrespective of any of the legislatures like Railways Tribunal Act etc. 9. As regards the merits of the case, we are surprised that the stand taken by the Railways. The so-called customer friendly different rules are so cumbersome that in most cases, it would be impossible for passengers to follow the rules without spending a great deal of time and effort. Most passengers may be put off by these rules rather than go through the entire gamut to obtain small refund. 10. For instance, in this case, the rules require that the ticket has to be surrendered at New Delhi itself within six hours from the scheduled departure of the train. Most passengers may be put off by these rules rather than go through the entire gamut to obtain small refund. 10. For instance, in this case, the rules require that the ticket has to be surrendered at New Delhi itself within six hours from the scheduled departure of the train. The train was scheduled to depart at 14.30 hours but got delayed by five and a half hours or so. Meanwhile, the respondent was making frantic efforts to reach her destination by some other means of travel. It was lucky for her that she could get a ticket in Rajdhani Express leaving at 17.00 hours or so. To expect a person in that stage of mind to go and surrender the ticket for the delayed train and get the refund is an unreasonable expectation. More so, if the passenger was travelling alone on her own. The next best thing she could do was to surrender the ticket at the destination station, which she promptly did and obtained a Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR). The Rule states that the Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) could be obtained within 30 days during the date of scheduled travel. Thus, it is seen that the respondent has been extremely prompt. 11. The argument taken on behalf of the Petitioners is that she should have submitted an application in the prescribed form. The rules do not say what a prescribed form is. Further, one cannot expect every travelling passenger to carry with them a set of ticket refund rules. A passenger would generally rely on what the authorities on the spot tell him or her. The respondent has averred that when she surrendered the unused ticket at Allahabad, the Station Manager had told that she would get the necessary refund within 90 days. It is the argument of the petitioner that there is no time limit in rules for giving refund and that the time limit of 90 days is only for submitting the refund application. The rules have to be reasonable and rational. A rule, which does not prescribe a time limit for grant of refund, can give no consolation to the consumer. 12. Having waited for 90 days and not getting the refund, the respondent sent two reminders and after that she filed the complaint before the District Forum. The rules have to be reasonable and rational. A rule, which does not prescribe a time limit for grant of refund, can give no consolation to the consumer. 12. Having waited for 90 days and not getting the refund, the respondent sent two reminders and after that she filed the complaint before the District Forum. During the pendency of the complaint before the District Forum, the Railways deemed it fit to grant her full refund of Rs. 445. It is strange that the Railways which argued before us that the rules have not been complied with in the sense. (a) The unused ticket was not surrendered at New Delhi Railway Station within six hours; (b) No application has been made in the prescribed form by the respon-dent to the Chief Commercial Manager (Refund); and (c) She is not entitled to full refund but with some deductions, have chosen to give full refund to her after the complaint was filed before the District Forum. 13. If the Railways hold the so-called customers friendly rules are as sacrosanct, we do not understand what motivated them to give the full refund to the respondent (without insisting on the rules) after a complaint was filed before the District Forum. It is obvious that the Railways has a discretion to grant refund notwithstanding the rules, provided the basic fact that the passenger had not used the ticket on which he/she is claiming a refund is established. By refusing to give her refund till she filed the complaint before the District Forum, we have to hold that there is harassment by the Railways and hence, it is deficiency in service. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the State Commission. 14. Before concluding we would suggest to the Railways to revise the refund rules and truly make them user friendly. If not in all the cases, there is need for simplification at least in cases where the amount of refund involved is less than say Rs. 500. 15. In view of the above discussion, order of the State Commission is confirmed and Revision Petition stands dismissed. Revision dismissed. ********