Latest News
Back
Document:
Service provided by the airport authorities does not qualify with the definition of “service” as defined in the Consumer Protection Act: SCDRC Punjab
The service provided by the airport authorities does not qualify or equate with the definition of “service” as defined in the Consumer Protection Act observed by The Punjab State and Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
Case of the Complainant
a complaint is been instituted by the Complainant before the District Forum, expressing that he applied for the re-issuance of his passport however the airport authorities kept conceding the issuance of the passport on some or the pointless reason. The Complaint alleged that the airport authorities are holding his passport arbitrarily, wilfully, and without a reasonable cause. The complaint sought directions to the authorities to issue his passport on the immediate basis and to also compensation him by paying of Rs80,000/ and Rs 15,000/ as litigation expenses, on the basis of being aggrieved by the inaction of the airport authorities in performing their obligation. The District Forum entertained the complaint and directed the authorities to issue the passport to the complainant.
The District Forum entertained the complaint and directed the authorities to issue the passport to the complainant.
Case of the Airport Authorities
An appeal is been filed by The Regional Passport Office, wherein the issue considered by the State Commission was whether the complainant falls within the ambit of definition of “Consumer “and whether the services provided by the passport authorities come under the definition clause of Consumer Protection Act defining the term “ services”.
Observation of the State Commission
President of the State Commission, Justice Paramjeet Singh Dhaliwal while citing the various judgments of the National Commission and the Supreme Court observed that 'the complaint made by the complainant with respect to the deficiency of airport authorities in providing their services does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection act, thus neither the complainant qualifies as a consumer nor the authorities services as “service” mentioned in the Act'.
The bench referred to the decision of the National Commission in the case of S. Vijaykumar v. Regional Passport Officer wherein it was held that the issuance of the passport cannot be held to be a “Service Provider” as it a statutory function and the Passport Office and thus the complaint made under the Act for delaying in the issuance of the passport would not be maintainable.
Case Details
Before: State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab
Case Title: Regional Passport Office v Gurpreet Singh Mangat
Bench: Justice Paramjeet Singh Dhaliwal, President State Commission
Date of Decision: 19.06.2020
Document:
