Q22: HPPSC Prelims 2018 GS-II: Previous Year Question with Answer

FRAUD ON PASSENGERS Tuesday bungling at Delhi airport once again confirmed that its monopoly position had made Indian Airlines as callous as it is inefficient. To recapitulate a disgraceful sequence, I.C.764, bound for Calcutta and scheduled to leave Delhi at 4:40 p.m., was suddenly and inexplicably cancelled without a word of explanation or apology. This is of course, an increasingly common occurrence nowadays with Indian Airlines, but the ingenious euphemism chosen this time was that I.C.764 has been merged with I.C.264, due to leave Delhi at 8:30 p.m., and that all passengers booked on the former were automatically guaranteed seats on the latter. It should be axiomatic by now that such assurances are meant to be ignored; but faith in officials promises dies hard and, on the whole, Indians still treat authority with far more respect than it deserves. The public will probably continue to do so even after Tuesday evening's nightmare experience when officials at the airport check-in counter for Calcutta brushed aside all previous undertakings and flatly announced that I.C.264 could not accommodate a large number of the passengers who had been booked on I.C.764 and were waiting to go to Calcutta. The stranded men, women and children were then advised to have their tickets rebooked for the following morning's I.C.401, but naturally, without a word of apology for the delay and inconvenience or any suggestion that Indian Airlines should accept responsibility for the extra night's board and lodging in Delhi. This churlishness was nothing, however, to the fraud that the airlines seem to have practiced on at least some passengers. When some of the people who have been shunted from I.C.764 to 264 and then told to come back the next day asked for endorsements for Wednesday morning's I.C.401. The Duty Officer at Delhi airport's departure lounge readily obliged, writing "O.K." on the tickets and signing his name, "D.S. Jolly". But, for reasons that can only be guessed at, he omitted to punch the relevant entry into the computer so that the endorsement was worthless and passengers who held what looked like trebly confirmed (for I.C.764, 264 and 401) tickets were again given the brush-off on Wednesday morning. As it happens, that particular Delhi-Calcutta flight was not full, so all – or, at least, most – stranded passengers were finally taken aboard, but not before acrimonious argument and uproarious confusion, with no one prepared to accept the chain of half-truths and downright false-hoods that the airline personnel trotted out, often with extreme rudeness, when they bothered to say anything at all. No doubt, Indian Airlines will now produce a detailed reply to explain away all complaints. But such excuses long ago ceased to command credence. Nor would a genuine explanation prove – or solve – anything. The point is that a bureaucratic monopoly like Indian Airlines enjoys is unworthy of the country; and if the new Government really wishes to serve the flying public better, it will allow some form of competition. Nothing else will save passengers from this kind of harassment. Q: "This churlishness was nothing, however, to the fraud that the airlines seems to have practised on at least some passengers." What does the author mean by saying "this churlishness"?