Challenge in these proceedings is to the order dated 27.06.2005 passed by Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore (in short, ‘the State Commission’) in appeal No. 260 of 2003 and appeal No. 336 of 2003.  

The revision petition has been filed after a delay of around 6 years and an application for condonation of delay has been filed alongwith the revision petition.  Since we are not convinced with the

-3-

cause mentioned in the application, we directed the presence of Divisional Commercial Manager, (South) Central Railway, Secunderabad.  He is present.

          We have heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Arya, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. P. R. Reddy, Divisional Commercial Manager (South), Central Railway, who is present in person.  Having done so, we are of the considered opinion that there does not exist any sufficient cause(s) on the strength of which, we should exercise our judicial discretion in condoning the unusual delay of about 6  years in filing the present proceedings.  Mr. P. R. Reddy, Divisional Commercial Manager states that an inquiry has been instituted in the matter for fixing the responsibility of the concerned official on account of which such unusual delay has been caused in filing the present proceedings.  We hope that such inquiry will be taken to its logical conclusion and requisite action as per the law will be taken against the delinquent official.  So far as the merits of the petition is concerned, learned counsel representing the petitioner does not seriously impugn the order passed by the State Commission but his only anxiety is that the order passed by the State Commission

-4-

may have very far reaching repercussions and may be utilized by other rail users.  In this regard, we simply observe that the decision rendered by the State Commission shall be deemed to have been rendered on its facts of the present case and will not constitute a precedent.

The revision petition stands disposed of in these terms accordingly.