BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.                                                              

                                                          Complaint No.: 68 of 2017.

                                                          Date of Institution: 27.04.2017.

                                                          Date of Order: 08.07.2019.

Sanjay Singh son of Shri Mahender, resident of village & Post Office Devsar, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.

                                                                             ….Complainant.

                                      Versus

Haryana State Transport Department, Bhiwani depot through its General Manager.

…...Opposite Party.

                             Complaint under Section 12 of the

 Consumer Protection, Act, 1986.

Before: -      Hon’ble Mr. Manjit Singh Naryal, President.

                   Hon’ble Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member.

                   Hon’ble Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Member.

Present:       Shri Surender Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Shri Akhil Dalal, ADA for the OP with Sh. Deshraj, Clerk.

ORDER:-

PER MANJIT SINGH NARYAL, PRESIDENT

                   Brief facts of the complainant’s case are that he is having a private Job in Delhi and on 30.1.2017 he was waiting for the bus from Peeragarhi Chowk to Bhiwani for returning to his village Devsar and in the mean time Bus No.HR-61B-7165 of Bhiwani depot arrived at about 7.15 pm and he had put a bag inside the bus and went for picking the second bag, but on the instruction of conductor the driver moved the bus.  It is further alleged that the complainant had tried to catch the bus by running and also ask the conductor for stopping the bus, but to no effect.  It is further alleged that the complainant had climbed on the back side stairs of the bus, as his bag was inside the bus.  It is further alleged that the complainant has requested the driver and the conductor of the above bus by calling them orally and by putting his hand on the body of the bus, but to no effect and they only stop the bus at Bahadurgarh and then he get inside the bus.  It is further alleged that the conductor & driver started misbehaving with the complainant and on demanding the ticket for Bhiwani, conductor has issued the ticket from ISBT, New Delhi to Bhiwani.  Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  Hence, this complaint.

2.                On notice, OP appeared and filed the contested written statement denying all the allegations of the complainant.  It is alleged that the complainant has himself has admitted that he put one bag inside the bus and then went down for picking the second bag without telling the conductor.  It is further alleged that as per the conductor all the passengers get inside the bus only then he had blown the whistle for moving the bus.  It is further alleged that there are 6 red lights from Piragarhi to Bahadurgarh, where every vehicle uses to stop and buses of the Transport Department use to stop there by abiding with traffic rules and the allegations of the complainant that the bus directly stop at Bahadurgarh from Piragarhi are wrong and false.  It is further alleged that as per conductor he had no argument with the complainant or with any other passenger on 30.1.2017.  It is further alleged that the complainant has not attached any ticket with his complaint.  It is further alleged that on receipt of complaint from the complainant, the OP has started the departmental inquiry, but the complainant himself not appeared despite issuance of registered letters to him.  Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

3.                Ld. Counsel for the complainant has placed on record the documents Annexure C1 to C4 in evidence to prove his version and close the evidence. 

4.                On the other hand, the OP has placed on record documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R5 and closed the evidence.

5.                We have heard learned counsel for the complainant as well as ld. ADA for the OP at length and have gone through the case file carefully.

6.                After hearing the learned counsel for the complainant and having gone through the material available on the records, we are of the considered view that the complaint deserves acceptance, as there is deficiency & unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.  Complainant has successfully proved his case by placing on record copy of legal notice Annexure C1 and Bus Tickets Annexure C3 (i) to (iii). 

Moreover, now-a-days the incidents of misbehave by the drivers and conductors of Government Buses with the passengers is rising day by day and in this case also appears the same matter.  The complainant has taken the plea that he had placed his bag inside the bus and went down for picking the second bag, but in the mean time on instruction of conductor, the driver certainly moved the bus.  The complainant has further alleged that he had tried to catch the bus by running and also by giving call to the conductor for stopping the bus, but to no effect.  He further alleged that then he climbed on the back side grille/stairs of the bus, as his one bag was inside the bus.  He further alleged that he has given many calls to the conductor as well as the driver of the bus for stopping the bus, but to no effect and they have only stop the bus at Bahadurgarh and then he get inside the bus.  In our view, the story put forward by the complainant in his complaint appears to be genuine and otherwise there is no occasion for the complainant to file the present complaint against the OP.  It is the duty of the OP to curb these type of incidents by taking some strict action against the conductors and the drivers, who use to mis-behave with the passengers and it is also the duty of the OP to give training to the conductors and drivers to teach them how to talk/behave with the passengers/public.  In the present case the OP could not take the appropriate steps to inquire the matter and they only written 2-3 letters to the complainant, but they have failed to place on record the copy of any explanation/reply given by the conductor and driver of the Bus in question, which itself shows that how serious the OP is in this matter.  So in our view the complainant is entitled for the compensation on account of mental and physical harassment & punitive damages for deficiency in service & mal trade practice on the part of the OP. 

7.                Therefore, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed with costs and the OP is directed: -

i.        To pay Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand only) as compensation on account of mental agony, physical harassment and hardship.

iii.      To pay Rs. 1100/- as litigation charges. 

The compliance of the order shall be made within 30 days from the date of the order.  Certified copies of the order be sent to parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 08.07.2019.       

(Saroj Bala Bohra)                    (Parmod Kumar)        (Manjit Singh Naryal)

Member.                         Member.                         President,

                                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                     Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.