Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2023) 07 NCDRC CK 0086

Additional Chief Secretary, Health Department vs Ashok Kumar Parjapat

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 18 July 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ram Surat Ram Maurya,Presiding Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Revision Petition Nos. 413, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422 Of 2022 And Second Appeal Nos. 31, 32, 33 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 332 words

Ram Surat Ram Maurya,Presiding Member

Heard counsel for the appellant/petitioner and respondent appearing in person.  The office has reported that the Second Appeals have been filed with a delay of some days.  The appellant has filed IA/9375/2022, IA/9378/2022, IA/9381/2022 and IA/9404/2022 for condoning the delay in filing the appeals.  Cause shown is sufficient.  The delay in filing the appeals is condoned.

The aforesaid second appeals have been filed against the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 12.04.2022 passed in Appeals No. 55, 98, 99 and 100 of 2021 by which the appeals filed by the respondent were allowed and the appellant as well as Director General, Haryana State Transport Corporation were jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.20000/- as compensation to the appellant.

The short issue involved in the present second appeals is as to whether the appellant can be treated as a service provider of the respondent or there is any relation of service provider and consumer between the appellant and the respondent.  So far as the appellant is concerned, it is a Government body.  It has only issued the circular for not smoking at public places.  Therefore, the appellant is not providing any service.  The only allegation of the respondent is that while he was travelling in the bus run by the Director General, Haryana State Transport Corporation, some person was smoking in it and the driver and conductor have failed to stop that person from smoking.  Therefore, there is no allegation that the complainant was a consumer of the appellant.  The direction of the State Commission for the appellant holding it jointly and severally liable to pay compensation is illegal and is set aside.  The appeals are allowed and the order of the State Commission dated 12.04.2022 passed in Appeals No. 55, 98, 99 and 100 of 2021 directing the appellant to pay compensation, is set aside.

This judgment will have no affect upon the Appeals filed by Haryana State Transport Corporation, against the same order.