1.       This consumer complaint has been filed by Kundan Lal Jayaswal, the complainant, under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( for short, ‘the Act’) alleging the deficiency in service on the part of Indian Railways.  The complainant purchased a circular journey railway ticket for 07.09.2017 and another tour ticket for 23.09.2017.  It was alleged by the complainant that the OP-department has charged excess fare for 544 kms. and 294 kms. from the complainant.  The excess amount charged by OP, was in contravention with the rules and procedures laid down for railway passengers in the booklet ‘TRAINS AT A GLANCE’.  Initially, on 01.11.2017, the complainant filed a complaint before the Executive Director, Indian Railways at New Delhi.  He also filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Delhi, Ahmedabad and Mumbai, however he could not get any relief.  Hence, he filed the present complaint before this Commission for seeking compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs alongwith cost of litigation.

2.       Heard the arguments at admission stage from the complainant, who argued in person.  I have perused the relevant documents like reservation forms, journey reservation tickets and the extract from ‘TRAINS AT A GLANCE’ filed by the complainant, namely, viz. annexures E, F2 and F3.  Moreover, it is transpired that before approaching this Commission, the complainant had filed complaint before different District Fora, but he could not succeed.  It is observed that the instant complaint is vaguely drafted.

3.       As per Section 21(a)(i) of the Act, the National Commission has jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed exceeds ₹ 1 crore.  On bare perusal of prayer clause of the complaint, at any stretch of imagination, the claim of complainant does not fall within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission, which should be above ₹ 1 crore.  The complainant herein has prayed for the compensation of ₹ 5 lakh, therefore, the instant complaint is not maintainable before this Commission.   I do not find any merit to admit the instant complaint.  Hence, it is dismissed in limine for lack of pecuniary jurisdiction.