State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Shri Bhikkhu Nand Mala vs Union Of India. Through Its Secretary, on 23 November, 2015
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA NAGPUR CIRCUIT BENCH NAGPUR First Appeal No. A/09/9 (Arisen out of Order Dated 20/11/2008 in Case No. 431/08 of District Nagpur) 1. Shri Bhikkhu Nand Mala Sariputra Boddha Vihar,New Kalish nagar, Chandramani nagar, Nagpur. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Union of India. through its Secretary, Railway Board, New Delhi 2. GENERAL MANAGER NARDEN RAILWAY,BADOHA HOUSE,NEW DELHI 3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER CENTRAL RAILWAY,STATION ROAD NAGPUR 4. TICKET COLLECTOR AGRA CHAVANI,AGRA ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. B.A.SHAIKH PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. S B SAWARKAR MEMBER For the Appellant: None For the Respondent: Adv. Mr H I Kothari ORDER (Passed on 23.11.2015) Per Mr B A Shaikh, Hon'ble Presiding Member
1. This appeal is preferred by the original complainant against the order dtd.20.11.2008, passed in consumer complaint No.431/2008, by the District Consumer Forum, Nagpur by which, the complaint has been dismissed.
2. The facts in brief which are relevant for deciding the present appeal are as under.
The complainant who was holding E-ticket was travelling by a Train from Delhi to Nagpur on 08.05.2008. However, the Traveller Ticket Examiner (TTE) when examined his said e-ticket, the complainant did not show him the Photo Identity Card referred to in that e-ticket and he also did not show any other photo Identity Card issued by State Government or Central Government or its authorities. Therefore, the TTE charged him 1904/- as penalty. The complaint was then filed before the Forum by the complainant against the Union of India and Railway authorities, claiming compensation of Rs.1.00 Lac.
3. The said complaint was resisted by the opposite parties (for short O.Ps) by filing reply. They submitted that on 08.05.2008 the complainant was travelling from Delhi to Nagpur by a train. He was asked to produce photo Identity Card. The certificate issued by All India Bhikku Sangh was shown by the complainant for his identification but it was not accepted by the O.Ps since it was not fulfilling the terms of electronic ticket. Thus, according to the O.Ps as the complainant did not show Identity Card as mentioned in the e-ticket, the O.P. No.4 levied penalty of Rs.1904/- on the complainant. The O.Ps also contended that the complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer as the e-ticket was gifted to him. It is also submitted that the certificate produced by the complainant cannot be treated as Identification proof. Therefore, it was prayed by the O.Ps the complaint may be dismissed.
4. The Forum below after hearing both the parties and considering evidence brought on record, passed the impugned order, observing that it is not proved that the Bhikku Mahasangh has any power to issue any such certificate for personal identification purpose and that therefore the same cannot be considered as an Identification proof. The Forum also observed in the impugned order that it was necessary for the complainant to produce any of the identification letter from any authority authorised by the Central Government or the State Government to issue any such identity proof. Therefore, the Forum concluded that as the complainant did not produce any such identity proof, the O.Ps have not rendered deficient service to him by imposing penalty of Rs.1904/-. The Forum therefore dismissed the complaint.
5. We have heard today respondent's Advocate Mr H I Kothari. None is present for the appellant for hearing. However, we have considered the Written Notes of Arguments of the appellant's advocate already filed on record. We have also perused the copies of the record of the original complaint produced by the appellant before us.
6. The learned advocate of the respondent has drawn our attention to the copy of e-ticket showing the ID No.999421004 as the ID proof which was referred to while obtaining the e-ticket. He also drawn our attention to the foot note of that e-ticket that on demand from ticket checking staff the passenger should produce the above noted photo Identity Card in original alongwith electronic reservation slip / print out.
7. Thus, the learned advocate of the respondent submitted that as the complainant did not show the said ID proof or any other proof as permissible under law, the O.P.No.4 has rightly imposed penalty of Rs.1904/- on the complainant and the Forum has rightly considered the aspect of the case. He therefore, requested that the appeal may be dismissed.
8. The appellant's advocate in his Written Notes of Arguments submitted that there is no guidelines issued by the respondents that if any person working in private company or doing business, then what type of Identity Card he should carry while travelling with the electronic ticket. He also submitted that as the complainant was carrying a certificate issued by All India Bhikku Sangh, wherein original photo was posted on it an as the said All India Bhikku Sangh was registered, the imposition of fine of Rs.1904/- by O.P.No.4 is against the law. He therefore, requested that the impugned order may be set aside.
9. The complainant has not explained as to why he was not carrying the same Identity Card bearing No.999421004, which was mentioned in the e-ticket. It was mandatory for the complainant to carry the same Identity proof alongwith him which is referred to in e-ticket as mentioned in the foot note of the said ticket. Therefore, in the absence of any such ID proof, it was necessary for him to show any other ID proof which is issued by any authority, duly authorised by State Government or Central government. He had also not shown any such ID proof to O.P. No.4. We find that the O.Ps have not rendered any deficient service to the complainant due to imposition of penalty of Rs.1904 on the complainant.
10. Thus, the Forum has rightly considered all the aspects of the case and committed no error in dismissing the complaint. The appeal therefore, deserves to be dismissed.
ORDER i. The appeal is dismissed. ii. No order as to cost in appeal. iii. Copy of this order be furnished to both parties free of cost. [HON'BLE MR. B.A.SHAIKH] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. S B SAWARKAR] MEMBER