KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL 517/2012
JUDGMENT DATED: 5..10..2012
PRESENT
JUSTICE SRI P.Q.BARKATH ALI : PRESIDENT
SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER
The Divisional Commercial Manager, : APPELLANT
Southern Railway,
Palakkad Division,
Palakkad – 678 002.
(By Adv.S.Renganathan)
Vs.
Mani Subramanian, : RESPONDENT
S/o Uma Maheswariayyar,
Residing at Karyasseri Madom,
Subramania Swami Temple,
East Nada,
Payyanur 670 307.
JUDGMENT
JUSTICE SRI P.Q.BARKATH ALI : PRESIDENT
This appeal is filed by the Divisional Commercial Manager Southern Railway, Palakkad division for Railway Commercial Clerk, Kasargod Railway station who is the opposite party in CC.129/12 of CDRF, Kasargod under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act challenging the order of the Forum dated June, 8th 2012 directing the opposite party before the Forum to renew the first class ticket of the complainant if it is not expired without obtaining any declaration form and if it is expired issue a fresh season ticket without obtaining any declaration form.
2. The complainant filed a complaint under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act before the Forum alleging that the opposite party in CC.129/12 Commercial clerk of Kasargod railway station is insisting him to sign a declaration as a pre requisite for renewal of his season ticket to travel by train in the route Payyannur –Kasaragod and that no declaration is prescribed under any of the rules of the Railways. He prayed for a direction to the opposite party to renew his season ticket without obtaining any declaration form expired.
3. The appellant/opposite party has contended before the Forum that the Divisional Railway Manager (Commercial) Southern Region issued a circular to obtain Ext.B3 declaration signed before issuance of a season ticket to the first class,.…that the said ….circular…is issued .as provided under Sec.60 of Railway Act,1989 which cannot be questioned in this proceedings, that obtaining such declaration was necessitated due to indiscriminate misuse of the facilities of first class ticket holders by traveling in reserved first class coaches and that therefore the complaint has to be dismissed.
4. No oral evidence was adduced by both the parties before the Forum. Exts.A1 and A2 were marked by the complainant and Exts.B1 to B3 were produced by the appellant/opposite party. The Forum found that relevant circular issued by the railways is invalid and it is quite unnecessary to obtain B3 declaration in the light of the endorsement on the season ticket to the effect that the same is valid only in unreserved first class and allowed the complaint and directed the appellant/opposite party as mentioned above. The Railway has come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.
5. When the appeal came up for admission today both the counsels were heard.
6. On going through the order of the District Forum we feel that there is no ground to admit the appeal. The District Forum has found that the rules issued under Sec.60 of the Railway Act have to be notified, then only it will be valid and that as the concerned circular issued by the Divisional Railway Manager, (Commercial) Southern Railway, Palakkad is not notified it is invalid. The Forum has also found that obtaining Ext.B3 declaration from the customers is quite unnecessary in view of the endorsement on the season ticket itself to the effect that “valid by unreserved first class only”. We find no reason to come to a different conclusion.
In the result we find no merit in the appeal the same is dismissed in limine.
JUSTICE SRI P.Q.BARKATH ALI : PRESIDENT
SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER
ps
