Complainantby filing this complaint has submitted that they are qualified graduate engineer and is employed as an Assistant Engineer and senior scientist (I.T. & C) in the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. and West Bengal Pollution Control Board respectively and they are frequent air passengers, inside and outside the country for official and private purpose and are well conversant with the Rules, Regulations, norms and conventions of both domestic and international flights.

          It is their allegation that complainant is a holder of valid GATE score card of 2012 and on the basis of result of GATE examination he applied to IIT, Mumbai for admission to M. Tech course and got an offer for appearing in written and oral test on 07.06.2012 and 08.06.2012 respectively at Mumbai and to appear the said examination and to make him free from any tension they purchased air tickets on 28.05.2012 through the op no.5 for proceeding to Mumbai along with his mother, the complainant no.2 in flight No. AI 676 on 06.06.2012 and return to Kolkata by flight No. AI 617 on 1`0.06.2012 on payment of Rs.27,208/- and accommodation was also booked on payment of Rs.2,500/- per day as advance.

          It is their further asserted that on the date of journey after facing the long queue the complainants could enter the domestic terminal of the NetajiSubhash Chandra Bose Air-Port at about 5:00 am and the employee concerned after being satisfied that boarding passes for that particular flight was being issued hurriedly x-rayed the baggage of the complainants who then stood in the queue for boarding passes at about 5:10 am on reaching the counter the complainants placed their baggage on the conveyor belt and gave their tickets to the assistant concerned, but it was informed that issuance of boarding passes for that flight has been closed and wrote “Departed at 6:35 am” on their tickets.  When it was pointed out to him that it was hardly 5:15 am and the said staff changed the time to 5:35 am by penning through which indicates that the said employee made endorsement of time arbitrarily and the complainants requested to the staff to issue the boarding passes as they were standing in the queue as no call was given to the passengers of that flight before closing issuance of boarding passes.  Moreover, they were in urgent need to reach Mumbai on that day early as the complainant no.1 had admission test for M. Tech in IIT, Mumbai on the following day and he then directed the complainants to approach the person in counter No.9, but that person flatly denied to issue the boarding passes and did not consider that the complainants were in the queue since 5:10 AM and issuance of boarding passes were closed without giving any call to the passengers of that flight standing in the queue in violation of the norms and conventions followed by all the airlines.  The complainants also approached the Traffic Manager for sympathetic consideration.  He was informed that the complainants had very little baggage which could be accommodated in overhead lockers and that the complainants will be seriously prejudiced unless they could reach Mumbai early as possible. But the Traffic Manager failed to appreciate the predicament of the complainants and even after all persuasions to the officers of the op’s he failed and the tickets in flight No.AI 676 dated 06.06.2012 had been cancelled and the complainants returned to their residence at Kasba as no ticket in earlier flight before flight No.SG 874 of Spice Jet leaving Kolkata at 6:00 PM was available.

          It is their further assertion that he has vast knowledge as frequent air passenger that counter staff always call the passengers of the flights standing in the queue before closing issuance of boarding passes of that flight and even during their return journey from Mumbai they found that the counter announced to the standing passengers in queue before closing issuance of boarding passes of that flight and on that day the price of tickets was shot up very high and for making extra profit the ops deviated from the normal procedure and convention and refused to give boarding and finding no other alternative way the complainants purchased tickets in flight No.SG 874 by spending further amount of Rs.30,584/- which left Kolkata Airport at 6:00 PM and reached Mumbai at late hours and after reaching there due to tension and anxiety he failed to concentrate in his study and ultimately did not qualify in the written test, but the complainants had to stay in Mumbai till they could board in flight No.AI 671 on 10.06.2012 by incurring huge expenditure as the tickets of that flight were purchased previously for return journey.

          Further it is asserted that the General Manager (Commercial), Air India Ltd. was informed of the whole matter by the complainant no.1 in his letter on 27.06.2012 and requested to refund the price of the ticket for the journey from Kolkata to Mumbai on 06.06.2012 in flight No. AI 676 which had to be cancelled for the negligence of the employees of the ops and damages for the harassment and mental agony caused to the complainants and loss of opportunity of the complainant no.1 to get admission in M. Tech course of IIT, Mumbai and P.S. Bandyopadhyay, op no.3 stated in his letter on 29.06.2012 that it is supposed to be a “no show” case and ticket value is not refundable in such case and also reported that the airport officials made endorsement on the tickets as “Departed at 6:35 am” which was later rewritten as 5:35 am and about the endorsement, P.S. Bandyopadhyay did not state anything about these lapses made by his employees at the airport and in reply to that letter on 29.06.2012 of P.S. Bandyopadhyay a further letter was given to him mentioning the happening of 06.06.2012 in detail vide letter dated 04.07.2012 and complainant requested to refund the price of the tickets from Kolkata to Mumbai by Air India Ltd. and damages for the deficiency of service of the employees of the ops Shri R. Tshering, the op no.4 informed that the matter was investigated by the Manager, Kolkata Airport about employees caused the deficiency of service and moreover the complainants were not heard with reference to their complaint.

          So considering the negligent and deficient manner of service of the ops the complainant was compelled to file this complaint for compensation and for refund of entire money of tickets.

          On the other hand op no.5 by filing written statement submitted that complainant purchased the valid ticket of flight No. AI 676 for the dated 06.06.2012 and a return ticket of flight No. AI 617 dated 10.06.2012 and there was no dispute with regards to the validity of the tickets of the complainants booked for Mumbai and further return ticket from Mumbai to Kolkata and it is submitted by the ops that they had no deficiency in service but deficiency in service on the part of the op no.1 to 4.  No doubt op no.5 is not liable for any compensation and so the complaint should be dismissed against the op no.5.

          On the other hand op nos. 1 to 4 by filing their written statement denied all allegations and has submitted that no doubt complainant purchased two air tickets for travelling from Kolkata to Mumbai by AI 676 on 06.06.2012 and the schedule time of departure of the said flight was 06:00 hours from CCU-Kolkata, India, Terminal-2 and it is specifically stated that in the tickets issued to them that check-in counter closure time in domestic flight is 45 minutes before departure.  It is further stated that counter closer timings are decided in conformity with Director General of Civil Aviation guidelines which will appear from the Official website (www.airindia.in) of the op no.1.

          It is also submitted that all the passengers who had reported at the check-in counter for AI 676 of that particular day of 6^th June 2012 by 5:15 hours were issued boarding passes and after completion of baggage check-in and other formalities, the check-in counter of the said flight was closed at 5:30 hours and the complainants reported at the check-in counter of the flight No. AI 676 in Kolkata Airport at 5:35 am after the check-in counter was closed on that day for which boarding passes were not issued.

          It is further stated that at the time of closing the capacity in the said flight AI-676 on 06.06.2012 was for 122 passengers but the said flight left Kolkata with only 112 passengers and there is no reason why the op nos. 1 & 2 could not be accommodatedin two seats though there was vacant 10 seats.  Had the complainants reported in time, they could also have been flown by the said flight but in fact complainants did not appear in time for getting their seats in the flight by 5:30 am and for which they could not enjoy the travel.  But there was no fault on the part of the ops and for which the compliant should be dismissed and further it is submitted that when the ticket was cancelled as per Rules, refund was made by the op.  So, the case should be dismissed on contest.

Decision with reasons

          After hearing the Ld. Lawyer for the op and also complainants’ agent and further considering the ops’ written version including the documents it is undisputed fact that Subhankar Deb purchased air ticket for their travelling from Kolkata to Mumbai and return journey well in advance and they booked two tickets in AI-676 of Air India Ltd. with time of departure was 6:00 am on 06.06.2012.  It is also fact that complainants appeared before the check-in counter but only dispute is that whether they appeared before check-in counter before closing of the check-in counter at 5:30am or not.  In this regard we have gathered that complainant filed Travel Etinerarry wherefrom it is found that official of the op Air India Ltd. noted on 06.06.2012 by their pen reported at 6:35 am and thereafter it was shown by the complainant no.1 then it was pen through and in place of 6:35 am it was noted 5:35 am.  This fact simply proves that employees or staff of the Air India Ltd. were not aware of the fact actually when the complainant appeared.

          But it is clear from the said document Annexure-1/1 that only to avoid the negligence on the part of the ops they pen through the same because if it would be noted 6:35 am in that case the employees shall be fraud employees.  But for sake of the argument if it is accepted that they appeared at 5:35 am in the check-in counter in that case it is clear that complainants were in the queue.  But anywhere it was noted by the authority who noted and reported at 6:35 am thereafter by penning through 5:35 am did not note that again and again it was announced to the passengers of the queue to come as check-in counter shall be closed at 5:30 am. 

          Truth is that invariably there was no announcement in respect of the first flight which will depart at 6:00 am if actually it had been done by the employees in that case the complainant as bona fide air passenger who availed off such service who had their knowledge and they are not first time availing of the present flight.  But fact remains that in Kolkata Airport at Dum Dum the service of all the air flight authority is very bad.  Fact remains that they casually sit in the counter and does not entertain the passenger properly and for which many passengers are being harassed by that Airport Authority employees.  It is not first time but in so many cases we have gathered when there are so many flight one after another in check-in counter there is a long queue of the passengers of different flights but the passengers are not informed by announcement that the passengers of the earlier flight shall be given preference to get boarding passes and for which in so many cases as we observe in previous occasion also at the time of deciding such dispute that announcement is not actually made though passengers are found in the queue in time.

          Further fact is that in so many cases many passengers even after standing in the queue they fail to avail of flight for want of non-supply of boarding passes only on the ground that time is over.  For the sake of the argument if it is accepted that the complainants appeared at the check-in counter after disposal of the check-in counter queue one after another they appeared at 5:35 am in that case it is clear they were in the queue and appeared in the queue in time.  But if actually the staff of the airport authority was careful and they were dutiful they ought to have announced that the passengers of Air India 676 dated 06.06.2012 shall report for receiving of boarding passes other passengers of subsequent air flight shall be given same after closer of boarding passes of AI-676 but that was not announced which is proved from the document of Annexure-A1/1 so in that case the employees of the Air India Ltd. ought to have note that even after announcement by them the complainants appeared at 5:35 am.

          So, considering all the above facts we are convinced that the present complainants having past knowledge to avail of flight and the procedure to appear before the queue of the check-in counter and also about the rules and regulations appeared in time but as because there was no announcement asking the passengers in queue of air flight No. AI-676 dated 06.06.2012 to come at once for which they failed to cross the queue because in queue all the passengers have their same right and they shall be entertained by the check-in counter one after another.

          Considering all the consequences and the circumstances we are convinced to hold that the complainants appeared in the line in time but as because on the date there is heavy rush of passengers of different flight made queue on different check-in counter and fact remains there was no announcement by the Airport Authority or the Air India Authority to the passengers of AI-676 to come forward to take boarding passes and for which some passengers failed to avail of said journey and for which in the said flights 10 seats were found vacant.

          In this context our present experience is that in the morning hours that is early morning hours flights are often cannot be availed of by many passengers in time no doubt for activities of the employees of the Air India Authority and out of many Airport of India the total management of the Kolkata Airport is very poor and in fact the employees are not carrying the order and they have not been taking care of the passengers and they did not think for the passengers and not only that they even do not care to inform by announcement to the passengers of any flight to comeforward from the queue for taking of boarding passes because the said boarding passes shall not be issued after certain hours.  This is the conduct of the employees and it is known conduct and in many cases the matter has been reported in so many newspapers and recent incident in respect of one Ld. Lawyer is also reported.  But fact remains that there is none to control the un-manner behavior and conduct of the employees of the Air Flight Authority because there is so many union and Airport Authority are not in a position to control the staff who are not serving air flight passengers properly.

          There are so many allegations against the Airport Authority and the Air Flight schedule.  But the persons, who have their fault, are not dealt with properly but they are accusing consumer, truth is thatthe allegations are against Kolkata Air Port Authority more and more but out of that some are being filed.  But the present situation has not yet been changed as no punitive measure is taken by the Airport Authority and the Airport schedule has not been implemented because the staff are found non-devoted and they are negligent in all respect and in the present case the negligence on the part of the employees of op nos. 1 to 4 is well proved from the document (one by one).

          Peculiar fact is that they noted that complainant appeared at check-in counter at 6:35 am and when complainant challenged it was changed to 5:35 AM.  This is the business of the employees they have their pen and they have their right to do anything.  But when complaint is filed by the complainant they stated that they appeared at 5:35 am at the check-in counter.  So, considering all the above fact we are convinced that practically for the latches and for negligence and deficiency of the service on the part of the op nos. 1 to 4 complainant failed to avail of the said flight though there was no latches on the part of the complainant and to reach Mumbai spent more amount to avail of other flight at 6:00 PM.

          Fact remains in this case Ld. Lawyer for the op tried to convince that there are so many ruling passed by National Commission by which National Commission has come to a conclusion that non-returning of the passengers till closer of the check-in counter shall be treated as no negligence on the part of the ops and for arrival at so late time air flight authority has no fault because air flight authority have given such chance to appear well in advance so that before closer of check-in counter the passengers may get boarding passes.  No doubt we agree with the finding, but fact and circumstances of each case shall be considered because it is a rule for the passengers up to what time they shall have to get the boarding passes and invariably the complainant complied that.  But only for non-announcement by the Airport employees or the Air India employees to inform the passengers in queue in the check-in counter to come forward to avail of the AI-676 on 06.06.2012 and announcement was not there if same had been announced in that case complainant had scope to avail of the said flight because he is very intelligent and they had their past knowledge at what point of time they shall have to appear before Air India for getting boarding passes.  But anyhow the very vital document Annexure-A1/1 as filed suggests that entire incident took place for employees and their administration who are callous and they are not performing/ serving the passengers as per guideline of the Civil Aviation Department or the Airlines Rules etc and practically for their latches negligent and deficient manner of service complainant failed to avail of the said flight and for which no doubt op nos. 1 to 4 are liable to pay the compensation by refunding the entire amount of the ticket of the complainants.

          But as because in the meantime complainant has been paid some amount after deduction and at the time of payment of the entire amount same shall be deducted by the op nos. 1 to 4 and thereafter shall have to pay the balance amount of the Air ticket and when the negligent and deficient manner on the part of the op nos. 1 to 4 are proved complainants are given compensation for harassment to the complainant and for their mental pain and agony.

          Thus, the complaint succeeds.

          Hence, it is

ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.10,000/- against op nos. 1 to 4 and same is dismissed against op no.5 without any cost.

          Op nos. 1 to 4 are jointly directed to refund the entire ticket amount in respect of the complainants’ ticket dated 06.06.2012 against Air India 676 and if any amount has already been paid by the op nos. 1 to 4 that shall be deducted and thereafter out one deduction of the same balance amount shall be refunded to the complainant and also to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/-for causing harassment, mental pain and agony which was caused by the op nos. 1 to 4 when there deficiency and negligencein service on the part of op is well proved.

          Op nos. 1 to 4 are hereby directed to pay the entire decretal amount including cost, compensation refund of ticket amount etc. within one month from the date of this order failing which for each day’s delay punitive damages @ Rs.200/- shall be imposed against the op nos. 1 to 4 till full satisfaction of the decree and same is collected it shall be deposited to this Forum.

          Op nos. 1 to 4 are directed to implement this order by complying very strictly within the stipulated period failing which penal action shall be taken against them under section 27 of C.P. Act 1986 and in that case Rs.10,000/- shall be imposed against op nos. 1 to 4 positively if they are reluctant attitude for implementation of this order is established.