Back
2006 (3) CPR 328
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PONDICHERRY
V. Bakthavatsalu, President & TMT P.V.R. Dhanalakshmi, Member
G. Shankar—Appellant
versus
The Additional General Manager, Southern Railways & Anr.—Respondents
First Appeal No. 10 of 2006
Decided on 28-9-2006
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Thiru A. Bakthavatchalam, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Thiru L. Sairajagopal, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Where a person travelling in train, on a ticket obtained under Tatkal Scheme failed to produce his photo identity in original and produced only Xerox copy of driving licence, Railway checking staff imposing penalty and extra fare was justified and there was no deficiency in service.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 12 and 17—Railway Service—Tatkal Sewa Scheme —Rules 6 and 17—All passengers who booked ticket on Tatkal Service were required to carry requisite identification as prescribed in Rule 6 which could be checked by ticket checking staff—Complainant-appellant while travelling on ticket taken in Taktal Service was asked to produce his identity card and he produced Xerox copy of his two-wheeler driving licence and failed to show/produce the original licence—Flying staff charged him excess fare ticket and penalty—Complaint claiming compensation alleging act of Flying staff as deficiency in service—Dist. Forum dismissed complaint holding respondent not guilty of any deficiency in service—Appeal—Whether there was any deficiency in service on part of opp. parties? No—No evidence to show that complainant was issued ticket only on production of Xerox copy of driving licence—Since complainant failed to produce the original driving licence, which should have been the basis on which ticket was booked, there was no deficiency in service—Appellant was not entitled to any relief. (Paras 7 to 10)
Result: Appeal dismissed.
V. Bakthavatsalu, J.—The complainant is the appellant.
2. The case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant purchased journey cum reservation ticket from Chennai Central to Howrah Junction under the Tatkal Sewa Journey Scheme on 16-4-2004 at Pondicherry. At the time of purchasing the ticket, the complainant had shown the Xerox copy of his two-wheeler driving licence to prove his licence identity. After ascertaining and satisfying the identity of the complainant, the ticket was issued to him. The complainant booked the ticket by Coromandal Express on 17-4-2004. The complainant traveled in the train as scheduled and during the course of checking in the train by Flying Squad, Chennai the complainant was asked to produce the journey ticket and it was produced along with the same identity card on which the ticket was purchased. When the original driving licence was asked, the complainant had stated that he had left it at his residence. But the Flying Squad charged him to pay an amount of Rs. 2,500/- as excess fare ticket stating that he had travelled and produced Xerox copy of the identity card and not with the original identity card. The action on the part of the Flying Squad is illegal and it was only on the production of the Xerox copy of the driving licence, the ticket was issued and insisting for the original on the way of the journey is against law and this has put the complainant into great mental torture. The complainant was having Rs. 2,000/- only during journey and the entire amount has been collected as excess fare ticket and that he had been put to great mental torture. The Flying Squad has no right to charge the amount of Rs. 2,500/- as excess fare. The complainant had only shown the Xerox copy of his two wheeler driving licence at the time of purchasing the ticket and the booking clerk at that time could have asked for the original driving licence. The complainant after reaching Kolkatta, issued notice on 9-10-2004 for which the opposite party sent a reply on 10-11-2004 requesting the complainant to send more details. Accordingly, the details sought for were furnished with the letter dated 28-3-2005. Till date no action was taken by the opposite parties. Hence, the opposite parties may be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 2,500/- collected as excess fare ticket along with interest at 18% p.a. and pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for mental agony.
3. The case of the opposite parties is as follows:
The complaint is not maintainable. As per Section 60(2)(a) of the Railways Act, the Central Government is authorized to frame rule for providing reserved accommodation to passengers. As such, the Central Government has framed rules for reserving accommodation in trains for the bona fide passengers, who wish to perform urgent journey under a new scheme Tatkal Sewa Scheme. As per the scheme, a few number of seats and berths in selected trains are earmarked for allotment to needy passengers on stipulation of some other conditions in order to prevent nuisance and cornering the berths and seats by unauthorized and anti-social elements. The rules pertaining to the scheme are strict. The provision was introduced to prevent blocking of berths by unauthorized persons and to prevent illegal purchase and selling of tickets. Para 6 of the rules elaborate about the documents that can be used as an authority to purchase the tickets. As per Rule 17, the passenger should carry the ticket and the same authority on which the ticket is booked during the journey and has to be produced while checking the tickets, failing which the passenger will be treated as travelling without ticket. The complainant purchased the ticket on 16-4-2004 at Pondicherry under the scheme. An amount of
Rs. 1414/- was collected while issuing ticket to him for journey from Chennai to Howrah. The allegation that the ticket was issued on production of the copy of the driving licence is denied. The complainant could not produce the driving licence on which
