Complaints Posted On Social Media Must Be Taken Seriously: Telangana High Court

The issue stemmed from a complaint posted on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) regarding the quality of food served by the tea stall at Secunderabad Railway Station. In addition to this complaint, multiple other grievances had been lodged against the stall, highlighting poor food quality.

The Court made this observation while dismissing the plea of a catering stall operator whose contract with South Central Railway had been terminated.

A Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya remarked that customer feedback on social media platforms is now widely accepted as a legitimate way for customers to voice complaints about services.

The Court pointed out that the petitioner, in this case, could not ignore complaints made on social media, particularly in an era where such platforms play a central role in communication. “Complaints/customer feedback on social media is an accepted mode of registering complaints against a service provider and the petitioner cannot adopt an ostrich policy in today’s time on the pretext that social media complaints do not deserve to be treated with seriousness,” the Court stated.

Advocate Aadesh Varma appeared for the petitioner, while Deputy Solicitor General Gadi Praveen Kumar appeared for the respondent.

The Court’s findings revealed that the catering operator had been given several chances to address the problems, but had failed to improve the quality of service. The railway authorities had imposed penalties on the stall operator on multiple occasions and even issued a warning letter due to the complaints posted on Twitter. A termination notice was eventually issued on November 7, 2024, after the operator failed to rectify the deficiencies despite repeated warnings.

The Court pointed out that the notice of termination clearly referenced the poor quality of food, including instances of food served that did not meet the required weight standards and were sold at rates above the prescribed limits. The Court confirmed that the railway had given the operator sufficient time and opportunities to address the issues, but the continued substandard service led to the decision to terminate the contract.

Thus, the Court concluded that the action taken by the railway authorities was justified, as it followed repeated failures on the part of the contractor to improve the service and rectify the deficiencies.

Cause Title: M/s Mathura Prasad & Sons v. The Union of India

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocate Aadesh Varma

Respondents: Deputy Solicitor General Gadi Praveen Kumar and Advocate NVR Rajya Lakshmi

Click here to read/download Order