NEW STATE ACADEMY vs DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

CHALLENGE in this revision is to the order dated 4.5.2006 of State Commission, Delhi allowing appeal against the order dated 23.1.2001 of a District Forum whereby respondent was ordered to pay Rs. 20,000 as compensation to the petitioner.

PETITIONER/complainant is an unaided private Senior Secondary School and has approximately 900 students on its roll. The respondent/opposite party undertaking has been providing transport facility to the students of petitioner and transport charges not having been paid at revised rate of Rs. 20 per km. as fixed by Government of NCT of Delhi, the respondent withdrew the buses from 3.11.1997 which led to the filing of complaint by the petitioner which was contested by the respondent. On admission, reference to two letters dated 17.7.1997 (copy at page 28) and 9.10.1997 (copy at page 29) sent by the respondent to the petitioner as also Clauses 5 and 14 of the agreement between the parties, is necessary. Clauses 5 and 14 provide as under: "5. That the second party shall charge from the students hire charges @ Rs. 12 per km. on the total kilometres operated by the school buses and remit the same to the first party. Besides this, the second party may also charge handling charges @ 11% of the total collections not exceeding Rs. 0.50 per km. from the students. The hire charges are subject to upward revision. The first party shall keep the second party posted of the revised rate, date from which such rates applicable, etc. whenever such revision of rates, etc. takes place.

That either party will be entitled to terminate the agreement on serving 15 days notice in writing."

By the said letter dated 17.7.1997, petitioner was intimated that rates of school charter services for transporting the students by the bus have been revised from Rs. 12 to Rs. 20 per km. for single deck buses w.e.f. 15.7.1997. Letter dated 9.10.1997 was sent with reference to letter dated 17.7.1997. Omitting immaterial portion, this letter reads thus: "It is matter of concern that in spite of conveying the decision well in time, the cheques have not been prepared according to the revised hire charges of Rs. 20 per kilometre. You are requested to clear the outstanding arrears i.e. Rs. 20 per kilometre instead of Rs. 12 per kilometre within 15 days on the receipt of this letter failing which the Corporation would be constrained to withdraw the operation of chartered school services to your school."

Short submission advanced by Mr. K.P. Sundar Rao for petitioner is that the respondent should have consulted the petitioner who in turn would have consulted the parents of the students who had to bear the burden of enhanced charges ultimately. Withdrawing of buses from 3.11.1997 without consultation, amounts to unfair trade practice as held by the District Forum. However, the submission is without any merit. To be noted that in terms of aforesaid Clause 5, only obligation cast on the respondent was to inform the petitioner of the revised rate and date from which it was to be applicable which the respondent discharged by sending the two letters dated 17.7.1997 and 9.10.1997. It was for the petitioner to have charged from the students and paid the revised charges to the respondent. By no stretch of imagination, respondent can be said to have indulged in unfair trade practice in withdrawing the buses from 3.11.1997 on failure of the petitioner to have paid charges at the revised rate. There is no illegality or jurisdictional error in the order passed by State Commission warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of C.P. Act, 1986. Revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.