UNION OF INDIA Vs. SATENDRA PAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 17.4.2002 passed by District Consumer Forum I, Bareilly in Complaint Case No.102 of 1998 which has been filed under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the 'act' ).

(2.) A complaint was initially filed by the complainant Satendra Pal Singh with the allegation that he is a handicapped person as certified by the competent doctor and he being an Advocate always travelled by rail from his local station to District Bareilly on the basis of monthly seasonal ticket issued by the opposite party-Railway administration under concession of the fare under the Railway Rules. On expiry of the ticket, the complainant on 24.9.1998 applied for fresh seasonal ticket for which forms were presented before the opposite party No.1. However, opposite party No.1 refused to allot seasonal ticket. Consequently the complainant had to obtain seasonal ticket on payment of full amount of fare on 25.9.1998, whereas seasonable ticket in respect of handicapped persons costs only 50% fare. Hence the complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum.

(3.) The opposite parties in the written statement alleged that the application for concessional ticket presented by the complainant was improper as well as incomplete and it was without proper requirement under the rules. The handicap certificate should have been signed by the competent medical officer with full particulars under their signature and date. The certificate in question neither contained any date of issuance of certificate nor it had the period of validity. Hence the application was rejected. Further fully handicapped persons are allowed a seasonal ticket with an assistant and it is not allowed without disclosure or any name of the assistant. In the case of the complainant these details have not been mentioned.