Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/612/2020

Ashok Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Health Department Haryana - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

18 Jan 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint  No	:	612 of 2020
Date  of  Institution	:	11.11.2020
Date   of   Decision	:	18.01.2024

 

 

 

 

 

Ashok Kumar s/o Sh.Dalbir Singh, R/o Village Mohalla, District Hisar (Haryana) 125042

             …..Complainant

 

Versus

 

Director (Driver-Conductor & Area Officer of Tobacco & Chief General Manager) through Directorate Haryana State Transport, 30 Bays Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh 160017

 

     ….. Opposite Party

 

 

BEFORE:      MR.AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,  PRESIDENT

                            MR.B.M.SHARMA             MEMBER

 

Present:-       Complainant in person

Sh.Chandbir Singh, Sub Inspector/Representative of OP along with Sh.A.P.S.Virk, ADA (Haryana State Transport)

 

 

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A (Eng.), LLM, PRESIDENT

 

1]       By this common order, we propose to dispose off two connected consumer complaints i.e. present consumer complaint as well as another consumer complaint No.613 of 2020 – Ashok Kumar vs. Director (Driver-Conductor & Area Officer of Tobacco & Chief General Manager) through Directorate Haryana State Transport.

2]       The facts are gathered from C.C.No.612/2020 – Ashosk Kumar vs. Director (Driver-Conductor & Area Officer of Tobacco & Chief General Manager) through Directorate Haryana State Transport.

3]       The complainant has filed the present complaint pleading that the complainant on 15.4.2019 travelled in the Bus of OP Transport from Kaithal to Ambala City on purchase of ticket for an amount of Rs.70/-.  It is averred that during the said journey, he noticed that the Conductor of the bus was smoking.  It is stated that due to smoking in the bus by the Conductor the complainant was disturbed and suffered physically as he was badly affected by the indirect smoking by the official of OP Transport. The complainant reported this matter to the OP Department whereupon the OPs imposed a fine of Rs.200/- only on the conductor of said bus.  It is also stated that the action taken by the OPs is just a formality and it did not recommend any measures to stop smoking in future, safety of passengers and compensation as well. 

         It is also pleaded that the OP has also illegally charged excess fare of Rs.5/- as the actual fare was Rs.65/- but the OP charged Rs.70/- from him. Alleging the said act & conduct of OPs as deficiency in service, hence this complaint has been filed.

4]       It is important to mention here that the complainant has filed both the present complaints against two OPs i.e. OP No.1 (Finance Commissioner, Health Department, Haryana, New Secretariat, Opposite Fire Brigade Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh 160017) and OP No.2- (Director (Driver-Conductor & Area Officer of Tobacco & Chief General Manager) through Directorate Haryana State Transport, 30 Bays Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh 160017).  Later on OP No.1 (Finance Commissioner, Health Department, Haryana, New Secretariat, Opposite Fire Brigade Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh 160017) was deleted from the array of parties vide order dated 13.10.2023, hence the present complaints survives only against OP No.2 (Director (Driver-Conductor & Area Officer of Tobacco & Chief General Manager) through Directorate Haryana State Transport, 30 Bays Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh 160017).  

5]       After notice of the complaint, the OP (Haryana State Transport) has put in appearance and filed written version stating that the complainant has moved a complaint against the conductor of the Bus and in response to that complaint, the answering OP has imposed fine on the Conductor of Rs.200/- vide Book NO.50, Receipt No.10, dated 15.4.2019 as per COPTA Act, 2003   (Ann.R-1).  It is also stated that as per Transport Department Order Endst.No.13/11/2016-6T(I) dated 16.12.2016 (Ann.R-2) it has been ordered that true charges shall be recovered from the passengers travelling on the buses of Haryana Roadways on Toll Roads as per schedule of rates given in notification from time to time and hence, in compliance of it, the complainant was charges Rs.70/- including Rs.5/- as Toll Fares as there was Toll between Kaithal and Ambala at Village Thana and therefore, no excess amount has been charged from the complainant as alleged. It is submitted that warnings regarding not doing smoking is written in all the buses of Transport Department and the word “No Smoking” has been written in each buses.  Denying other allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

6]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

7]       We have heard the complainant in person, Representative as well as ADA of OP and have perused the entire record including written arguments.

8]       From the pleading of the parties and documents on record, it is observed that the OP in its written version has clearly stated that in response to the complaint of the complainant about smoking in the bus in question, after enquiry, they imposed a fine of Rs.200/- on the Conductor of Rs.200/- vide Book NO.50, Receipt No.10, dated 15.4.2019 as per COPTA Act, 2003 (Ann.R-1). Thus the allegations of the complainant about smoking in the bus in question is proved, which clearly amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP and it certainly has caused harassment to the complainant.

9]       The Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, while dealing with similar issue as in the present case, in a bunch of Revision Petitions bearing No.206/2023, 265/2023, 533/2023 titled as Director General, Haryana State Transport & Anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar Prajapat, decided on 17.10.2023 has held :-

“In the opinion of this Commission, the award of Rs. 5,000/-by way of compensation in each of the three complaints for the inconvenience/discomfort faced due to exposure to passive smoking in the public vehicles would appear to be reasonable and sufficient”.   

 

10]      As far the plea of overcharging of Rs.5/- towards the fare is concerned, the same is not tenable.  The OP has right charged fare of Rs.70/- including Rs.5/- for Toll Charges as per Order of State Government Annexure R-2. 

 

11]      Similar facts have been pleaded in another connected complaint and similar evidence has been led in it.  Therefore, in both these cases, deficiency in service on the part of the OP is proved. 

12]      Taking into consideration the above discussion & findings, we are of the opinion that both the consumer complaints deserves to be partly allowed and the same are accordingly Partly Allowed against OP. The OP is directed to pay to the complainant a lumpsum of Rs.5000/- each in both complaints as compensation towards harassment as well as litigation expenses.

         This order be complied with by the OPs within ninety days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

13]      Pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

         The Office is directed to send certified copy of this order to the parties, free of cost, as per rules & law under The Consumer Protection Rules & Act accordingly. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

18.01.2024                                                               

Sd/-

 (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER