STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

BIHAR, PATNA

Appeal No. 01 of 2023

Md. Nasiquzzama, S/o- Abdul Hadi, Dwelling at Mohalla, Chhajju, PS- Bihar, District- Nalanda- 803101

                                                                                                                                      … Applicant/Appellant

Versus

1.   Deputy Post Master, Amber Post Office, Bihar sharif, Nalanda- 803101

2.   Post Mater, Head Post Office, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda- 803101

3.   Superintendent of Post Office, Nalanda, Bihar sharif- 803101

4.   Chief Post Master General, Bihar Circle at Patna- 800001

                                                                                                                                      …. Opposite Parties/Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant: Nasiquzzama (In Person)

Counsel for the Respondent No 1 to 4: Adv. Sudhir Kumar Tiwary

Before,

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar, President

Mr. Ram Prawesh Das, Member

Dated:-11.09.2023

As per Sanjay Kumar, President.

O r d e r

1. Present appeal has been filed on behalf of complainant/appellant for enhancement of amount of compensation granted by order dated 10.11.2022 passed by Ld. District Consumer Commission, Nalanda, at Bihar sharif in Complaint case no. 20 of 2016 whereby and whereunder the Ld. District Consumer Commission has granted Rs. 25,000/- compensation for loss of time and mental agony with interest @6% p.a from 27.07.2012 till payment within 30 days and further directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- for pecuniary loss, mental and physical harassment and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of litigation within 30 days failing which interest @9% p.a shall become payable.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case is that advertisement dated 07.02.2013 was  published in Dainik Jagran for appointment against the vacant post of Assistant Prosecution Officer, Govt. of Bihar through Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna in which last date for receipt of application was 08.03.2013 till 5:00 P.M. Complainant submitted his application through speed post on 04.03.2013 at 11:36 AM from amber sub-post office, Nalanda. It is submitted that speed post in Urban Area should reach its destination within 48 hours and in rural areas within 72 hours. However, his application through speed post was delivered after scheduled date as such he was deprived to appear in the examination which shows gross negligence of postal department for which complainant is entitled for grant of adequate compensation.
3. Complainant further stated that he was working as safety officer in private company at Delhi on Salary of Rs. 16,000/- per month from where he was transferred to NTPC, Dadari, however for the post of Assistant prosecution officer he left the job to prepare for appointment to the post of Assistant prosecution officer and he spent Rs. 2,25,000/- to purchase books, stationeries and coaching fees and due to leaving job of safety officer he suffered loss of Rs. 9,68,000/- as salary and on account of being deprived to sit in examination he suffered mental agony for which he claimed compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- Total compensation claimed is Rs. 19,93,000/-.
4. Opposite party appeared and filed their written statement in which it is stated that U/s 6 of Indian Post Office Act, 1898 they are not liable to pay compensation for late delivery of postal articles and complaint has been filed after 2 years as such complaint case was time barred.
5. The District Commission after hearing the parties and considering the materials available on record has held that complainant is a consumer.
6. The District Consumer Commission has further held postal department has failed to deliver the speed post within the stipulated period as assured by the postal department and has relied upon the judgment and order of National Commission in which scope and ambit of Section 6 of Post Office Act has been dealt and it has been observed in case of CPMG & Ors Vs. Garima Gupta, 2017 (III), CPJ 251 “Petitioners failed to bring on record any evidence to show that mis sending was not on account of willful act or default on part of employees as stipulated in the latter part of Section 6 of Post Office Act. Young student has lost a valuable one year in getting admission in institution of her choice, compensation @Rs. 20,000/- rightly awarded.”
7. The District Consumer Commission held that due to deficiency in service of postal department the application of complainant could not be delivered within time as a result of which complainant was deprived of sitting in the examination for one year and accordingly awarded compensation of Rs. 25,000/- from 27.07.2012 till date of payment with interest @6% p.a, Rs. 20,000/- compensation for physical and mental harassment as well as pecuniary loss and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of litigation within 30 days failing which interest @9% p.a shall become payable.
8. Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated  10.11.2022 passed by Ld. District Consumer Commission, Nalanda, at Bihar sharif in Complaint case no. 20 of 2016, appellant/complainant has filed this appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation.
9. It is submitted on behalf of counsel for the appellant that adequate and just compensation has not been granted by District Commission for the loss and injury suffered by complainant due to gross deficiency in service by postal department. Complainant left his job for preparation for Government job and since then was preparing for APO but due to failure of postal department he could not appear in the APO examination which is not conducted every year. All efforts made by complainant in preparation of examination and expenses incurred in such preparation and his much time and hard work went in vain as complainant was deprived from an opportunity to compete in APO examination.
10. Having heard the leaned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials available on record, the only question that falls for consideration is whether appellant/claimant has made out any case for enhancement of the amount of compensation.
11. The defense of the postal department is of “exemption” from liability for delay in delivery under section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898, however section 6 of the Act does not provide blanket immunity to the officials of postal department to cause loss and injury to its consumers.
12. Complainant is entitled for  compensation on proof of loss due to negligence of opposite party. The Consumer Commission is to decide the quantum of compensation to which complainant is entitled which has to be fair, reasonable and commensurate to loss.
13. The contention of complainant that he left job in private sector only for preparation to compete for govt. job and as such salary of Rs. 9,68,000/- for the period he left job as well as expenses in purchase of books and stationary and fees for coaching cannot be accepted. No candidate prepares only for one examination. There is nothing on record to establish that complainant had qualified in any other competitive examination for government job in which he had appeared. There cannot be any presumption that had complainant appeared in the examination he would have been successful in the competitive examination as such compensation can not be quantified on basis of assumptions and presumptions. The claim of compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- for mental agony is highly exaggerated.
14. The advertisement for appointment against the post of APO was published on 07.02.2013 and last date for acceptance of application was 08.03.2013. Complainant ought not to have waited for last week to send his application form and that to from a rural sub post office Amber (Nalanda) as there is chances of delay in delivery of application send by speed post. Had complainant been serious and sincere candidate he should have send his application form earlier to ensure it reaches BPSC within stipulated period. Chances of delay in delivery of speed post can not be ruled out and it is only for this reason that ministry of communication (Department of Post) has provided compensation in case of late delivery of speed post vide notification dated 21.01.1999 which reads as “ In case of delay in delivery of domestic speed post beyond the norms determined by the department from time to time the compensation to be provided shall be equal to the composite speed post charges paid”.
15. In the judgment and order relied upon by the appellant the total compensation for late delivery by registered post has been granted as Rs. 20,000/-.
16. For the reasons as stated above, this Commission does not find any infirmity or error in the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Nalanda and no case for enhancement of quantum of compensation amount is made out.
17. Appeal is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed.

.

(Ram Prawesh Das)                                                                                                         (Sanjay Kumar,J)

       Member                                                                                                                           President

Md. Fariduzzama