The Hindu : Commission pulls up transport corporation

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Feb 05, 2004

Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu

Commission pulls up transport corporation

By K.T. Sangameswaran

CHENNAI, FEB. 4. "The behaviour of conductors of the public transport system is so notorious that it is always the talk of the town. They treat passengers with gross contempt and never miss an opportunity to abuse them and treat them with utmost disrespect. Their conduct is well known for discourtesy and they are synonymous with disservice," the State Consumer Disputes Redress Commission (SCDRC) has said.

Justice A.Raman, president, and A.Vanaroja, member, made this observation allowing an appeal by a passenger, who travelled by a Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) bus, challenging a district consumer forum's order.

The Bench directed the corporation to pay the passenger a compensation of Rs.5,000, refund a fare of Rs.141 and Rs.250 as cost.

Guruji of Tiruvannamalai complained to the forum that he boarded a bus of the Salem Division, Dharmapuri (Annai Sathya Transport Corporation), at Tiruvannamalai, to go to Bangalore in March 1998. The vehicle broke down after it travelled 29 km.

When he approached the conductor for an alternative arrangement, he made fun of him and refused to refund the fare.

The conductor told him if he had to travel standing in another vehicle, he should do so.

As Guruji thought he would not be able to reach Bangalore in time and also due to the conductor's behaviour, he returned to Tiruvannamalai.

He cited the corporation's Managing Director and Periyasamy, a conductor of Salem Division-2, Krishnagiri depot, as opposite parties.

`Act of God'

The corporation submitted that the bus breakdown "was an act of God". All stranded passengers were accommodated in other vehicles. The conductor was not rude. He helped the passengers. The forum dismissed the complaint. Against this, the passenger filed a petition.

The Bench said the breakdown could not be termed God's act. Buses should be maintained properly. The breakdown proved negligence and bad maintenance.

It was not the opposite parties case that there was an alternative bus going to Bangalore with plenty of accommodation and that the complainant refused to travel.

The corporation could not expect passengers to travel according to its convenience or compel them to take an alternative bus, in which there was no sitting accommodation.

The passenger waited for two hours and could not be accommodated in another vehicle. In case of a breakdown, if passengers did not want to take another bus, it was the conductor's duty to refund the fare.

"They cannot insist that the passenger wait indefinitely or travel by other buses with all inconvenience," the Commission said.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Tamil Nadu

News Update

Stories in this Section

Tamil Nadu will seek Rs. 8,001-crore plan outlay

Govt. geared to tackle water crisis

POTA panel has right to call for records: court

Commission pulls up transport corporation

Sports varsity to be set up

CPI will finalise candidates on Sunday

Clash between Rajnikant fans, PMK men averted

Understand coalition compulsions, Vasan tells Congress cadres

Tribal children to benefit from new anganwadi centres