Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

78/2013

P.Senthilkumar, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.A.Aravind kumar

11 Jul 2016

ORDER

 

                                                           Complaint presented on  :  28.03.2013

                                                                Order pronounced on  : 11.07.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,         :      PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,            :     MEMBER II

 

MONDAY  THE  11^th   DAY OF JULY 2016

 

C.C.NO.78/2013

 

 

P.Senthil Kumar,

S/o.P.Padmanaban,

No.3/185/7E. Kamatchi Avenue,

Kannadasan Nagar,

Thiruvallur – 602 001.

                                                                                    ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

	1.The General Manager, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram – 605 602.
	2. The General Manager, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation, Salem – 636 007.                                                                                 …..Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                  05.04.2013

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.R.Aravindh Kumar

Counsel for  1^st  Opposite party                :G.Palani

Counsel for  2^nd  Opposite Party            :K.RaviKumar

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1. THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant is residing at Thiruvallur from the year 2009. He used to travel regularly from Thiruvallur to Koyambedu by utilizing the services of the Opposite Parties bus. They have two routes to reach Koyambedu from Poonamallee, one is viz Poonamallee-Porur –Guindy-Koyambedu covering 24 kms charging ticket Rs.14/- and the other is Poonamallee –Maduravoyal  -Koyambedu covering 16 kms charging ticket Rs.9/-. Due to the implementation of the  Metro Rail Project, the Opposite Parties bus were not operating through Porur, Guindy and the same are  plying in the Maduravoiyal route. The Maduravoyal route is 8 kms less and the fare is also Rs.5/- less than the Porur, Guindy route. Approximately 200 buses are plying in the Maduravoyal route within a span of 10 hours and 5,000 – 10,000 public are utilizing  services of the Opposite Parties and hence  roughly about a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is collected excess per day from public. The route Poonamallee- Maduravoyal- Koyambedu the ticket is charged at Rs.14/- i.e excess of Rs.5 per ticket than the actual ticket  cost of Rs.9/- is illegal and higher than the normal fare . The Complainant is  being the regular traveler has to loose  Rs.10/- per day to travel from Poonamallee to Koyambedu and return. Approximately during the period November 2011 to till date he would have travelled 200 times and accordingly he would have sustained a loss of Rs.2,000/-  by paying excess  charge of Rs.5/- per ticket. The Opposite Parties are collecting excess fare for enriching themselves. The illegal act of charging excess ticket fare is nothing but an unfair trade practice and thereby caused mental agony to the Complainant by committing Deficiency in Service. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint to reimburse the sum of Rs.2,000/- for utilizing the service and compensation for mental agony with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE 1^st  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The bus fares of the Opposite Parties have been fixed by the Government and the same is revised by the Government through various G.O’s. The Complainant allegation   that the Opposite Party enriched by collecting additional fare is baseless.  Each route fare has been fixed and the same is increased or decreased only by the Government. In many cases the Corporation Buses were redirected with changing of routes by the Government or by the Police Authority. However, in such circumstances the corporation has no authority to increase the fare and collected the same. The allegation that he has regularly travelled from Thiruvallur to Koyambedu is a self servicing statement without any documentary proof. In fact, no transport corporation authorities or employees forced the Complainant to bear the additional expenditure when many buses were operated with ordinary fare from Tiruvallur to Koyembedu via Maduravoyal. In fact, the Complainant whose destination is Koyembedu from Tiruvallur has saved much time to reach Koyembedu via Maduravoyal as was the case of the other general public who has shown satisfaction in traveling the buses operated by the Opposite Parties herein at the instruction and direction of the government. As already stated, the transport corporation cannot penalize the general public when the prescribed route has been diverted for temporary reason if any operating kilometers have been increased, since the same has to be done by the Government and similarly for temporary reason of divert of route which minimize the operation of bus into a less kilometers, the transport corporation cannot reduce the bus fare for all of a sudden without the permission of the government. This Opposite Party never adopted any unfair trade practice and committed any Deficiency in Service and therefore prays to dismiss the Complaint.

3. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  2^nd OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The 2^nd Opposite Party is operating buses only in the permitted route i.e Poonamallee – Porur-Guindy – Koyambedu, The 2^nd Opposite Party is not operating buses through Poonamalle- Maduravoyal – Koyambedu. The 2^nd Opposite Party is not collecting any excess fare. The 2^nd Opposite Party is collecting only the correct fare. The 2^nd Opposite Party is operating only 6 buses in the Poonamallee – Porur – Guindy –Koyambedu route. The Complaint that the 2^nd Opposite Party operating buses in Poonamallee – Maduravoyal –Koyambedu and clandestinely collecting excess amount from the general  public are all false  and imaginative and the Complainant is put to strict proof of the same. The allegation that the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties gained a huge sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/- illegally is utter false and imaginative without any base. The 2^nd Opposite Party has not collected a single penny from this Complainant or from anybody else illegally. This Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service and prays to dismiss the Complaint.    

4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

5. POINT NO :1

          According to the Complainant there are two routes to reach Koyambedu from Poonamalle one is viz Poonamallee – Porur -Guindy- Koyambedu covering 24 kms with a ticket charges of Rs.14/- and the other route is Poonamallee- Maduravoyal-Koyambedu covering 16 kms with a ticket charge of Rs.9/- and due to implementation  of Metro Rail Project in the Porur - Guindy route, all the buses plying on the said route are diverted and plying  the other alternate Maduravoyal route and however the Maduravoyal route fare is  Rs.9/- was not collected for the Porur - Guindy route buses while plying in the Maduravoyal route,  instead they charged a sum of Rs.14/- towards ticket charges by excess of  Rs.5/- and therefore the Opposite Parties committed unfair trade practice by collecting excess of Rs.5/- Per ticket.

          6. Ex.A2 is the RTI reply furnished by the 1^st Opposite Party to the Complainant and in the said reply admits the allegations of the Complainant that in respect of both the routes distance and fares and difference fare of Rs.5/- are as stated above.

          7. The main contention of Opposite Parties is that the Government only fixed the fares and therefore to modify or revise the fares the same could be done only by the Government and not by the Transport Corporation. Ex.B1 is the Government Order fixing fares of the Transport Corporation for various stages. In the said order the Governor of Tamil Nadu issues directions to the State Transport Authority and the Original Transport Authority regarding the fixation of fares to guide the transport authorities the stage wise fares have also been fixed by the Government in the G.O itself. Based on that G.O Transport Authority shall fix the fares stage wise. Therefore as per the G.O the State Transport Authority are fixing the fares based on the directions issued in Ex.B1 Government Order. Therefore as contended by the Opposite Parties the transport authority has no right to raise or reverse or modify the fares while the buses are plying subsidiary routes, since the destination or terminal point are one and the same. The Government alone is competent to alter the fares. Admittedly the Complainant did not approach the Government to modify or alter the fares while plying in a subsidiary route. Further the Complainant also has not added the Government as a party in the Complaint. Therefore in view of the forgoing discussions the Complainant did not represent his grievances to the Government and also not added the Government as a party to this proceedings and further the Opposite Parties are not competent to reverse the fares excepting the Government, we hold that the Opposite Parties have not committed any unfair trade practice and thereby committing Deficiency in Service and accordingly this point is answered.

8. POINT NO :2

Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief in this Complaint and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed without cost.

In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 11^th    day of July 2016.

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated NIL                     Bus Tickets

Ex.A2 dated NIL                     RTI Reply

Ex.A3 dated 07.01.2013                   Legal Notice sent by the Complainant

Ex.A4 dated NIL                     Acknowledgement card

Ex.A5 dated 05.04.2013                   Reply Notice by Opposite Parties

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE 1^st OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

Ex.B1 dated  17.11.2011                  G.O.M.S.No.783

Ex.B2 dated 05.04.2013                   Reply legal notice of 1^st Opposite Party with

                                               acknowledgement card.

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE 2^nd  OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

                                                …..NIL……

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT