DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.<br /> CC.No.377 of 03.12.2009<br /> Decided on 13.07.2010<br /> <br /> Sham Sunder Rao H.No.9-1-34/30/29 Bapu Nagar, Langer House, Hyderabad Now posted at Soldier in Indian Army, Bathinda Cant.<br /> ......Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> 1. Union of India through its General Manager, Ministry of Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi.<br /> 2. Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt., through D.R.M. Ambala Cantt.<br /> 3. Station Superintendent, Northern Railway, Bathinda.<br /> .......Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM<br /> <br /> Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member.<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member.<br /> <br /> Present:-<br /> For the Complainant : Sh.Sanjay Goyal, counsel for the <br /> complainant.<br /> For Opposite parties : Sh.Vinod Garg, counsel for opposite parties.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-<br /> <br /> 1. In brief, the facts of the complaint are that the complainant had reserved two tickets from Bathinda to Hyderabad on 18.08.2009 and also reserved return journey tickets for himself from Hyderabad to Bathinda for 06.09.2009 as the complainant had to leave his wife at Hyderabad and both the tickets were purchased and reserved from Bathinda. When the complainant was returning from Hyderabad by A.P. Express on reaching New Delhi, he changed the train and started journey by Janta Express from New Delhi to Bathinda on 07.09.2009. After reaching at Bathinda Railway Station on 07.09.2009, the complainant was about to came out of the exit door of railway station, one Ticket Checker (TC) namely Mr. Sanjay Kumar stopped the complainant and demanded check soldier ticket (CST), the complainant told the Ticket Checker that he has forgotten his check soldier ticket (CST) at Hyderabad and the complainant showed his original warrant counter part on which the CST PNR No.216-2991302 was mentioned and the complainant also told that his ticket was checked in previous station also. Since original CST was not with him but original warrant counter part having PNR was available and as per PNR Number previous Ticket Checker verified the PNR Number and have seen the ID card of the complainant and as such the complainant was allowed to travel by train. The complainant requested the Ticket Checker to verify the PNR Number and ID(Identity) proof of the complainant but Ticket Checker insisted for original CST so the complainant asked the Ticket Checker that he can get it faxed from Hyderabad but Ticket Checker insisted that he will neither verify the ticket from PNR Number nor will allow him to receive the fax from Hyderabad and called the railway police force. The complainant further alleged that he requested the Ticket Checker that he has to report his unit and in case he does not report than the complainant shall be got marked absent and he shall be declared absconding but the complainant was not allowed to leave the station and was detained like criminals although Ticket Checker and railway staff had sufficient means to verify the CST of the complainant but they did not agree and inserted the word “invalid without original ticket” on the warrant and as such he was not allowed to leave the railway station. The Ticket Checker fined the complainant for traveling without ticket from Fazilkat to Bathinda and threatened him, in case he does not pay the fine than he would be sent to jail. The complainant after joining his duty, lodged the complaint to the senior official Mr. Darshan Kumar on 10.09.2009, but no action was taken.<br /> 2. The opposite parties on the other hand have pleaded that the complainant was traveling without reservation slip as well as Check Soldier Ticket (CST) at the time when he was checked for the same. The opposite parties pleaded that the complainant did not disclose that he was traveling from Hyderabad to Bathinda, he was charged on the basis of last train i.e. Fazilka to Bathinda. If he had disclosed that he was traveling from Hyderabad to Bathinda, he could be charged much more i.e. fare from Hyderabad/Delhi to Bathinda plus Rs.250/- as penalty as per rules. The opposite parties have also denied the contention of the complainant that he was stopped near the exit door of railway station, rather the complainant was checked on foot over bridge by the said Ticket Examiner. At that time the last approaching train was Fazilka-Bathinda train (4FKB Passenger). When the complainant was asked to show his ticket, the complainant was not having any ticket. The opposite parties have denied that the complainant had shown his original warrant counter part. The opposite parties pleaded that as per rules it is mandatory to carry both reservation slip and check soldier ticket (CST) with him while traveling in a train and they must produce the same. Both these documents must be surrendered at the destination as per rules. Accordingly, the complainant was treated as without ticket and charged fare of Rs.20/- from Fazilka to Bathinda of 4FKB Passenger Train plus penalty of Rs.250/- i.e. Rs.270/- in total. The opposite parties further pleaded that if the complainant had told the Ticket Examiner that he was traveling from Hyderabad to Bathinda via Delhi, he could be charged even more as per rules. The complainant has not disclosed the facts to Ticket Examiner/Ticket Checker. The opposite parties have also denied that the Ticket Checker was asked by the complainant to verify the PNR number or ID proof of the complainant. The Ticket Examiner asked the complainant to produce the original check soldier ticket (CST) and Reservation Slip as per rules as they are to be surrendered at the destination.<br /> 3. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.<br /> 4. Arguments heard at length. Record perused.<br /> 5. The complainant had been traveling by A.P. Express from Hyderabad to Bathinda. After reaching to New Delhi, he proceeded his journey by Janta Express for Bathinda at about 8 p.m. on 07.09.2009. He was stopped by one Ticket Examiner namely Mr. Sanjay Kumar who demanded check soldier ticket (CST) which he had forgotten at Hyderabad and the complainant showed his original warrant counter part on which the CST PNR No.216-2991302 was mentioned. The complainant requested the Ticket Checker to verify the PNR number and ID proof but the Ticket Checker insisted for original CST(check soldier ticket). The complainant asked the official that he can get it faxed from Hyderabad but TC insisted that he will neither verify the ticket from PNR number nor will allow the complainant to receive the fax from Hyderabad. The opposite parties took legal objection that the complainant was traveling without reservation slip as well as check soldier ticket (CST). Moreover the complainant did not disclose that he had travelled from Hyderabad to Bathinda. He was charged on the basis of last approaching train i.e. Fazilka Passenger Train. If he had disclosed the fact that he had been traveling from Hyderabad to Bathinda, he could be charged much more i.e. fare from Hyderabad/Delhi to Bathinda plus Rs.250/- as penalty as per rules. The opposite parties have also raised objections that the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint and the complainant is not consumer. The complainant was checked on foot over bridge by the Ticket Examiner. At that time the last approaching train was Fazilka-Bathinda train (4FKB Passenger) and the complainant was asked to show his ticket which was not in his possession. He was charged fare of Rs.20/- from Fazilka to Bathinda plus Rs.250/- as penalty.<br /> 6. A perusal of documents placed on file revealed that the complainant had reserved his seat from Hyderabad to New Delhi for 06.09.2009 and New Delhi to Bathinda for 07.09.2009. In this way, the journey was continuous from Hyderabad to Bathinda. Although it is mentioned on the reservation slip, invalid without original ticket. He was having original warrant counter part on which the CST PNR No.216-2991302 was mentioned. These slips were computer generated. The opposite parties have also not seen his ID proof as requested by him. Above mentioned two documents are sufficient to verify the PNR number and verify the identity of a person but the opposite parties failed to do so. There is no proof of the detention of the complainant by the opposite parties. They have only charged fare of Rs.20/- plus Rs.250/- as penalty. The complainant had purchased the tickets from Bathinda and paid consideration for the tickets. Hence he is consumer of the opposite parties as he booked tickets from Bathinda. Hence the Consumer Forum at Bathinda has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint at Bathinda. A perusal of Ex.R-6 shows that the arrival time of both trains is i.e. 4FKB pan and 9023 foop at 19:55 and 19:50 respectively, which means the arrival time of both the trains is almost same. There is difference of only five minutes. The passenger can take 10-15 minutes time for coming out from the train till reaching at foot over bridge. The assumption of Ticket Examiner is wrong. Instead of verifying the check soldier ticket (CST), the opposite parties imposed fine of Rs.250/- plus fare of ticket i.e. Rs.20/- from Fazilka to Bathinda which was paid by the complainant. The counsel for the opposite parties have produced the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case tiled Ravneet Singh Bagga Vs. M/s. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and another wherein it is held that <br /> “Deficiency in service – Burden of proof – The burden of proving the deficiency in service is upon the person who alleges it.” <br /> This law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not applicable in the present complaint as the complainant has fully proved his allegations by producing various documents on record. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.3. Therefore this complaint is accepted against opposite party No.3 with Rs.3,000/- as cost and compensation for mental harassment and dismissed qua opposite party Nos.1 and 2. The opposite party No.3 is further directed to refund Rs.270/- charged from the complainant. <br /> 7. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<br /> 8. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record.<br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)<br /> 13.07.2010 President<br /> <br /> <br /> (Dr. Phulinder Preet)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> (Amarjeet Paul)<br /> Member