National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) while going with the applicable commands of the Bureau of Immigration, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, ruled in SpiceJet Ltd. V. Dinesh Kumar & Anr that Aadhaar card isn’t a legitimate document for tour to Nepal/Bhutan.
Commission become hearing a revision petition in opposition to the order of the State Commission of Punjab. The factor of competition turned into that the complainant specifically Dinesh Kumar had booked a price tag Delhi- – Kathmandu – Delhi thru the net travel co., departing from Delhi on 05.07.2013. He had produced his e-price ticket and Aadhaar card on the airways organization’s test-in counter. The airlines company did no longer receive Aadhaar card as a legitimate/perfect travel record for travel to Nepal (Kathmandu) and refused to difficulty a boarding bypass.
The District Forum vide its Order dated 30.09.2014 allowed the complaint, holding the airlines enterprise liable, and dismissed the criticism against the web journey agency. The State Commission vide its Order dated 22.01.2016 dismissed the appeal of the airways organization. The gift revision petition become filed with the aid of the airlines corporation below segment 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before National Commission in opposition to the said Order dated 22.01.2016 of the State Commission.
The relevant facts imprinted on the e-price tag, issued via the web travel company made it obligatory to hold Government identified photo identification (ID) together with E-Ticket. This, it study, can include: Driving License, Passport, PAN Card, Voter ID Card or another ID issued via the Government of India. For little one passengers, it’s miles mandatory to hold the Date of Birth certificates.
Aadhar now not a legitimate file for tour to Nepal
Commission while passing the order noted that the statistics at the e-price ticket does no longer specially mention Aadhaar card to be a valid / suitable tour file for journey to Nepal and the instructions of the Bureau of Immigration in particular proscribe Aadhaar (UID) card as a legitimate / proper tour report for journey to Nepal / Bhutan.
Rejecting the argument made on behalf of the complainant that “Aadhaar card” falls within “some other ID issued through Government of India” mentioned on the e-price ticket as “erroneous”, Commission stated that Aadhaar quantity is a 12-digit random number issued by way of the Unique Identification Authority of India to the citizens of India after pleasing the verification system laid down through the stated Authority, and might in no way be construed to be “every other ID issued through the Government of India” within the particular context of it being a legitimate / ideal travel report for travel to Nepal.
It also said that there is no law made underneath the Act of 2016 declaring Aadhaar card (wide variety) as a legitimate / appropriate tour file for tour to Nepal nor do airline organizations have get admission to to the Aadhaar database.
“… there is no linkage between airlines cos. And the Aadhaar database for any reason which includes for the purpose of treating Aadhaar card as a legitimate / desirable journey record for journey to Nepal. Eight. And, in all contingencies, the commands of the Bureau of Immigration, which particularly avoid aadhaar card as a valid / perfect travel document, supersede any statistics and so on. Written by using any on-line tour co. And so forth. On its e-tickets.”
Commission, but, cleared that it has no intention to critique Aadhar card and that a treatise on ‘Aadhaar card’ would be ill-conceived and misplaced at the a part of a quasi – judicial tribunal in the gift information and context of the case before it.
Commission observed that the District Forum has erred in allowing the criticism in opposition to the airlines corporation and the State Commission has erred in dismissing the attraction of the airlines employer and set apart the orders of each District Forum and the State Commission.
It additionally discovered the complaint filed by using the complainant Dinesh Kumar to be frivolous and vexatious inside the meaning of segment 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 dealing with dismissal of frivolous or vexatious lawsuits.
Commission disregarded the grievance with stern advice of caution to the complainant thru imposition of value of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited through the complainant with the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the District Forum inside 4 weeks of the pronouncement of this Order, the objective being to emphasize that purchaser safety fora aren’t supposed to be equipment for developing nuisance via filing frivolous and vexatious lawsuits.