Rajasthan

Jaipur-II

678/2012

AKARAM ALI - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHRAWAN KUMAR VERMA - Opp.Party(s)

05 Jan 2015

ORDER

OFFICE OF DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM         JAIPUR-II

 

 

 Before:                                    Mr.  R. S. KULHARI                          PRESIDENT

                                                          Mr.  SHREECHAND KUMAWAT    MEMBER       

                                                          Mrs. HEMLATA AGARWAL            MEMBER

 

CASE NO – 678/2012

         Akram Ali S/o Shree Dr. Mukarram Ali, Age 32Years,Cast Musalman,

         R/o- 595/01, Akbari Masjid ke pichhe,Amer Jaipur.

                                                                                                Complainant

Versus

         Shravan Kumar Verma, Address- J-14, Jhalana Industrial area, Passport

         Office, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur.   

                                                                                               Opposite Party

 

Case under Section 12, Consumer Protection Act

                              Attended: -

                                     Shree Aziz Mohammad Counsel for the Complainant

                                     None present for the Opposite Party

 

                                     Date of Presentation of complaint – 27.04.2012

                                     Date of Decision                            - 05.01.2015 

 

 

                                       The Complainant has filed this complaint stating inter alia that the opposite party  ( O.P. for short here-in-after ) has issued  passport of the complainant on 07/05//2007, but inadvertently the agent of the complainant has not mentioned  details of  his  marriage in  prescribed form therefore the correspondence between O.P. and the complainant was pending. Meanwhile the O.P. has impounded the said passport vide order dated on 26/07/2012

                  It was alleged that during that period the complainant was to go   to foreign to look-after his ailing wife. The complainant has purchased air ticket etc. and conveyed all the facts to O.P. but O.P. has not released his passport and thus caused the deficiency in service and complainant has suffered a lot of financial loss. Thus the complainant sought the relief as mentioned in para 11 of the complainant.

                   The O.P. in his preliminary objections, stated that the complainant is not covered under the definition of consumer and the O.P. has acted in his official capacity to working under subordination of the ministry of foreign affairs and the ultimately under the union of India. Therefore the complaint is not maintainable before this forum. It was also clarified that complainant has concealed the information about his marriage and fraudulently got the passport issued from O.P. The O.P. has acted as per provision of Indian Passport Act 1967 and his act is purely an administrative one therefore the complaint be rejected summarily.

                   The complainant has submitted his affidavit along with documents and has also produced the written arguments.

                   We have heard the argument of the advocate of the complainant and perused the record.

                   It is an admitted fact that the complainant got his passport issued from the O.P. on 07/05/2007 and thereafter the same was seize by O.P. on 26/02/2012 vide annexure 3. All the actions purported to have been taken by O.P. are apparently done in his official capacity and not in the capacity of individual or of the institution. The O.P. was working under subordination of ministry of foreign affairs and the union of India who inturn have not been made parties in the complaint. Thus in view of the fact and circumstances, there is no stretch of imagination that there exist any relationship of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the O.P. as such the complainant is not a consumer and the complaint is not maintainable before this forum and is liable to be rejected on this count only.

                      Furthermore the complainant has himself stated that he has not narrated the true picture of his matrimonial status before the passport author-ity. Though, he has tried to justify it on the basis, that  his agent has not mentioned it due to inadvertence but his justification is not plausible because the agent is supposed to fill up the form as per direction of the complainant and this is the clear-cut concealment of fact on defect of the part of the complainant. Thus the action taken by O.P. cannot be said to be arbitrary or baseless. However the complainant is free to have remedial measure on the administrative side against any action of the O.P. but no relief may be given to him by this forum.

                      Therefore the complaint is dismissed for the reason as stated above.              

 

(SHREECHAND KUMAWAT)      (HEMLATA AGARWAL)           (R.S. KULHARI)

     MEMBER                                   MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

 

 

Order pronounced and signed on 05/01/2015

 

 

 

(SHREECHAND KUMAWAT)      (HEMLATA AGARWAL)           (R.S. KULHARI)

     MEMBER                                   MEMBER                        PRESIDENT