KUNDANLAL JAYASWAL vs EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (P.G. CELL) & ANR

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 9.8.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, ''the State Commission'') in Appeal No. 80 of 2015 - Kundan Lal Jayaswal Vs. Executive Director (P.G. Cell) & Anr. by which, appeal was allowed.

Brief facts of the case are that complainant/petitioner filed complaint before District Forum against OP/respondent for certain deficiencies regarding irregularities, misconduct and inconvenience caused to him while travelling from Ahmedabad to Howrah via Jabalpur. OP resisted complaint. Learned District Forum dismissed complaint treating matter not a consumer dispute. Appeal filed by complainant was allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order and matter was remanded back to District Forum to decide complaint afresh against which, this revision petition has been filed by petitioner.

Heard petitioner in person and perused record.

Petitioner submitted that instead of remand, learned State Commission should have decided complaint and awarded compensation; hence, revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back to learned State Commission.

Order of District Forum runs as under: "We have heard the complainant and Railway office. We do not find any consumer dispute in the complaint. The complainant is a Retired Railway Employee, and therefore, wrote to concerned senior officer at Ahmedabad for administrative action against TTE. Their response etc. or no proper response does not raise any consumer dispute for this Forum. The complaint is misconceived. It is dismissed".

As order of District Forum was not speaking order and was not passed after consideration of oral and documentary evidence, learned State Commission rightly set aside the order and remanded the matter back to learned District Forum for deciding complaint afresh after giving opportunity to the parties to file evidence. Learned State Commission was not required to decide complaint on merits when order of District Forum was not speaking order and I do not find any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order and revision petition is liable to be dismissed at admission stage.

Consequently, revision petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed in limine.