Date of Filing:       08.09.2014

                                                                                                                       Date of Disposal:  23.10.2019

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

THIRUVALLUR-1

PRESENT: THIRU.  J. JUSTIN DAVID, M.A., M.L.                                 .…. PRESIDENT

                   TMT.      K. PRAMEELA, M.Com.                                         ….. MEMBER-I

                   THIRU.  D.BABU VARADHARAJAN, B.Sc., B.L.                 ..… MEMBER-II

CC.No.62/2014

THIS WEDNESDAY THE 23^rd    DAY OF             OCTOBER 2019

A.Vishnuprasad, S/o.Adi Kesavalu,

No.561, Gandhi Nagar,

Melnalathur Village,

Thiruvallur – 602 004.                                                                          …..Complainant.

                                                                             //Vs//

1.The Inspector General CISF (South Zone),

    South Zone Headquarters,

    Rajaji Bhavan, D Block,

    Besant Nagar, Chennai 90.

2.The Deputy Inspector General CISF (South Zone),

    South Zone Headquarters,

    Rajaji Bhavan, D Block,

    Besant Nagar, Chennai 90.

3.The Assistant Commandant,

   CISF, South Zone Headquarters,

   (DDO) South Zone,

   South Zone Headquarers,

   Rajaji Bhavan, D Block,

   Besant Nagar, Chennai 90.

4.The Assistant Commandant,

    In charge of Applications Scrutiny Team,

   CISF South Zone Headquarters,

    South Zone Headquarters,

    Rajaji Bhavan, D Block,

    Besant Nagar, Chennai 90.

5.The Postman,

    Melnallathur Village Post Office, Melnallathur,

    Managalanager, Thiruvallur.

6.The Post master,

    Manavalanagar Post Office S.O.,

    Thiruvallur – 602 002.

7.The Head Post Master,

    Thiruvallur Head Post Office,

    Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur – 602 001.

8.The Chief Post Master General,

    Chennai Circle,

    Office of the Chief Post master General,

    Chennai -600 002.                                                                        …..Opposite parties.

This complaint is coming upon for final hearing before us on 20.09.2019 in the presence of Mrs.G.Malathi, Counsel for the complainant and in the presence of Mr.T.Arivarasan, Counsel for the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties and complaint against the 1^st to 4^th opposite parties given up by the complainant and therefore this forum dismissed the complaint against the 1^st to 4^th opposite parties on 03.11.2014 and perused the documents and hearing the arguments on both sides, this forum delivered the following

ORDER

PRONOUNCED BY THIRU.J.JUSTIN DAVID, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been preferred by the complainant Under Section 12 of the consumer protection Act-1986 against the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties for seeking a direction to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for not delivering the postal letter addressed to the complainant within the stipulated time and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and stress due to the deficiency in service on the part of the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties and to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- towards the cost of this complaint.

2.The brief averment of the complaint is as follows:-

The complainant had applied for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF on 20.09.2013 and he was called upon to appear for the written examination conducted by the 2^nd opposite party and he has selected in the written test and the admit card for PST/Documentation of ASI/Steno-2013 was issued in the said written test and admit card for PST/Documentation of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno)-2013 was issued to the complainant for the purpose of further participating in the selection process. The admit card is said to have been sent by postal cover addressed to the complainant’s addressed as aforesaid.  The aforesaid call letter is sent by a postal cover and the postal seal reveals that the same has reached the Thiruvallur PS on 26.11.2013 and on the same date there is also another seal on the cover dated 26.11.2013 pertaining the Manavalanagar PS.  On receiving the aforesaid postal cover addressed to the complainant within time, the 5^th opposite party had wantonly and deliberately failed to deliver the same to the complainant without any valid reason thereby apparently causing deficiency in service.  The aforesaid callousness in the discharg of duty by the 5^th opposite party is not supervised by the 6^th and 7^th opposite parties amounting to vicarious liability at the instance of the 6^th opposite party, 7^th and 8^th opposite party in respect of the deficiency  in service by the 5^th opposite party in delivering the said letter to the complainant.  The postal cover was received by the complainant only on 10.12.2013 at 3.30 pm, when the complainant had opened the said letter the complainant had come to know that the same was an admit card which has called upon the complainant to appear for physical standard test/documentation which is only in furtherance of the aforesaid selection process to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) for which the complainant has aspired to join.  The letter clearly reveals that the complainant had to appear on 10.12.2013 at 8.00 am for the physical test and for documentation checking.  In terms of the said admit card, the call-up letter for physical standard test/documentation it is provided that, “in case you do not report at the specific venue, date and time then your candidature will stand cancelled and no further chance will be given” it is also been specified that “you must bring this call-up letter in original with you, if you fail to bring the same your candidature will be cancelled”.  That on account of the apathy and indifference showed by the 5^th opposite party, the complainant had lost the opportunity of appearing before the physical test as well as the submitting of documentation in respect of the selection process pertaining to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF. The complainant had totally lost the opportunity to complete in the selection process to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF only on account of the callousness wanton and deliberate dereliction of duty at the instance of the postal authority being the 5^th opposite party. On account of the aforesaid, the complainant had been put to immense suffering, hardship and loss.  Therefore on 21.01.2014 the complainant issued legal notice to the 1^st to 4^th opposite parties and thereafter on 18.03.2014 the opposite parties issued reply for the fact that the department will not be responsible for the postal delays the candidate may check CISF website from time to time for updated information.  On 26.06.2014 the complainant also issued a legal notice to the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties to pay the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant for not delivering the postal letter addressed to the complainant within the stipulated time and the same was served.  Hence this complaint.

3. The brief contention of written version of the 5^th to 8^th  opposite parties is as follows:-

The complainant Sri A.Vishnuprasad is a permanent resident of Melanallthur village which comes under the delivery jurisdiction of Melanallthur BO a/w Manavalanagar SO 602 002.  The Register Letter bearing No.RT237530554IN was booked at Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090 by DIG, CISF (South Zone).  The regular GDSMD Sri. P.Panneerselvam was discharged from duty on 30.09.2013.  Afterwards one outsider Sri.M.Lhogeshvaree was engaged to work as GDSMD in the vacant post.  The delivery area of Melanallthur BO is very vast which has more than 3,000 houses approximately.  The outsider was not able to locate the addressee.  Hence the article was kept in the BO as deposit up to 10.12.2013. Since the outsider was not able to deliver so many articles, the service of the Ex-GDSMD were utilized and with the help of the GDSMD Sri. P.Pannerselvam only the articles were delivered.  The said RT237530554IN was also delivered to the addressee on 10.12.2013.  The complainant has alleged that the delivery of register letter was purposefully, wantonly delayed and the same was not correct, since the outsider who worked in the vacant place had actually made all out efforts to deliver the register letter addressed to the complainant. The opposite party denied that it is stated by the complainant that the admit card addressed to him is carrying the date stamp impression of the date 26.11.2013.  This is confirmed with the help of branch office records dated 26.11.2013.  The outsider was new to the branch office and considering the vast delivery area of Melnallathur BO and therefore the Register Letter No.RT237530554IN could be delivered to the addressee only on 10.12.2013.  The person working as GDSMD in the vacant place was not able to locate the addressee despite the best efforts taken by him.  Hence the article was kept in the BO deposit up to 10.12.2013.  The outsider who worked in the place of vacant GDSMD, Melnallathur BO had since been disengaged from working in the vacant place. Therefore there is no deficiency in service by the opposite parties.  As per section 6 of Indian Post Office Act-1898, “The Indian post office is exempted by law from all the responsibility in the case of loss, misdelivery or delay or damage to, any postal article in course of transmission by post”.  The validity of section 6 of the Indian Post office Act-1898 has been upheld in revision petition No.986/1996 by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi.  Therefore this forum may be pleased to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.

4.  In order to prove the case, on the side on the complainant, proof affidavit submitted for his evidence and Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 were marked.  While so, on the side of the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties, the proof affidavit filed and Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 are marked and also adduced oral argument on both sides.

5. At this juncture, the points for determination before this Forum is as follows:-

(1)Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?

(2)Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation and cost?

(3)  To what other reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?

6. Point No. 1& 2:-

 The case of the complainant is that the complainant had applied for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF on 20.09.2013.  The complainant has qualified for applying the above said post and called upon for written exam and subsequently he was selected for oral interview.  The DIG in CISF sent the admit card to the complainant through post and the said postal card reached the THIRUVALLUR post office on 26.11.2013 and the same was sent to the MANAVALANAGAR Postal service on 26.11.2013 for delivery.  But the 5^th opposite party has failed to deliver the same to the complainant and delivery the postal cover only on 10.12.2013 at 3.30 pm. The calling letter clearly reveals that the complainant had to appear on 10.12.2013 at 8.00 am for physical test.  But the complainant was unable to appear for the physical test on 10.12.2013 and the complainant loss the opportunity for selection for the Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF.  Therefore the opposite parties committed deficiency in service to the complainant and thereby the complainant put to hardship and mental agony and loss.

7. The 7^th opposite party filed a written version for himself and on behalf of the 5^th, 6^th and 8^th opposite parties.  The 7^th opposite party contented that the registered letter bearing No.RT237530554IN was booked at Besant Nagar post office by Deputy Inspector General, CISF (South Zone).  Mr. P.PANNEERSELVAM was discharged from duty on 30.09.2013, afterwards one outsider Sri. M.LHOGESHVAREE was engaged to work as GDSMD in the vacant post.  The delivery area of MELANALLTHUR Branch Office is very vast which has more than 3,000 houses approximately therefore the outsider was not able to locate the addressee.  Hence the article was kept in the Branch Office as deposit up to 10.12.2013. Since the outsider was not able to deliver so many articles, the service of the Ex-GDSMD were utilized and with the help of the GDSMD Sri. P.PANNEERSELVAM only the articles were delivered.  The said RT237530554IN was also delivered to the addressee on 10.12.2013 and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Further as per Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act-1898, “The Indian post office is exempted by law from all the responsibility in the case of loss, MIS-DILIVERY or delay or damage any postal article in course of transmission by post”.  Hence the complainant is not entitled for any compensation.

8. The complainant originally has filed this Consumer Complaint against the 8 opposite parties.  The 1^st opposite party is the Inspector General CISF, the 2^nd opposite party is the Deputy Inspector General CISF (South Zone), the 3^rd opposite party is the Assistant Commandant CISF, South Zone Headquarters, the 4^th opposite party is the Assistant Commandant CISF In charge of Applications Scrutiny Team South zone Headquarters, the 5^th opposite party is the Postman, MELNALLTHUR Village Post office, the 6^th opposite party is the Post master MANAVALANAGAR Post Office, the 7^th opposite party is the Head Post Master, THIRUVALLUR Head Post Office and the 8^th opposite party is the Chief Post Master General, Chennai Circle.  The complaint against the 1^st to 4^th opposite parties were dismissed has not pressed on 03.11.2014.  The 7^th opposite party filed written version for himself and on behalf of the other opposite parties 5, 6 and 8.

9. The complainant is residing at MELANALLTHUR village, THIRUVALLUR District.  The complainant had applied for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF on 20.09.2013. The complainant was qualified to appear for the written examination conducted by the opposite party and the complainant also selected in the written test and admit card also issued to the complainant by the concerned opposite party.  Ex.A1 is the copy of admit card issued by the Assistant Commandant, In charge of Applications Scrutiny Team, CISF south zone Headquarters, Chennai -90. The admit card sent by the Assistant Commandant to the complainant through post and the said letter has reached to the THIRUVALLUR postal service on 26.11.2013 and the same has been sent to the MANAVALANAGAR postal service for delivery to the complainant.  The opposite party in their written version and in the proof affidavit admitted that the THIRUVALLUR post office received the postal cover on 26.11.2013.  The Ex.A2 is the copy of original postal cover issued by Dispatcher, Recruitment cell, CISF South zone Headquarters, Besant Nagar, Chennai -90 to the complainant.  The back side of the postal cover it contain the date and seal of the THIRUVALLUR Post office in which the date has stated as 26.11.2013.  Therefore THIRUVALLUR post office received the postal cover containing admit card on 26.11.2013 and the same was sent by the THIRUVALLUR post office to the MANAVALANAGAR postal service on the same date itself for delivery to the complainant . But the post man of the MELNALLTHUR Branch office who is the 5^th opposite party in the complaint delivered the postal cover to the complainant only on 10.12.2013.  The Branch Post Master also made an endorsement in Ex.A2 cover is as follows:- “Delivered on 10.12.2013, signature of the BPM and Dated: 10.12.2013”.  The opposite parties admitted in the written version and in the proof affidavit that the post man of the MELNALLTHUR Branch office who is the 5^th opposite party delivered the postal cover to the complainant on 10.12.2013.  The MELANALLTHUR Branch office kept the postal cover from 26.11.2013 to 10.12.2013 without any valid reason. For which the opposite party alleged that the regular GDSMD Mr. P. PANNEERSELVAM was discharged from duty on 30.09.2013, afterwards one outsider Sri. M.LHOGESHVAREE was engaged to work as GDSMD in the vacant post and the delivery area of the MELNALLTHUR Branch office is very vast which has more than 3000 houses approximately. Therefore the outsider was not able to locate the addressee.  Hence the above article was kept in the BO as deposit up to 10.12.2013. Since the outsider was not able to deliver so many articles, the service of the EX-GDSMD Mr. P. PANNEERSELVAM was utilized and with the help of the GDSMD Mr. P. PANNEERSELVAM only the articles were delivered on 10.12.2013 to the complainant. But there is no endorsement in the postal cover stating that the postman was unable to locate complainant’s address up to 10.12.2013. Further the opposite parties filed Ex.B2 stating that the post man delivered the article on 26.11.2013. Ex.B2 is the Xerox copy of Register but there is no date seal and signature. At the same time the opposite party also not produced the original Register for the Xerox copy.  The opposite party agreed in the written argument and in the proof affidavit that the delivery of postal cover to the complainant only on 10.12.2013.  Hence Ex.B2 cannot be accepted.

10. The Assistant Commandant, In charge of Application Scrutiny Team, CISF South zone Headquarters issued the admit card to the complainant for reporting physical test on 10.12.2013 at 8 am.  The postal cover containing the admit card and the same was booked at Besant Nagar post office bearing No.RT237530554IN.  The said cover was received by the THIRUVALLUR Head Post office on 26.11.2013 and the same was also received by the MELNALLTHUR Branch Office on the same day.  But the post man of the MELNALLTHUR Branch Office delivered the postal cover to the complainant only on 10.12.2013.  It is the duty of the post man to deliver the article to the addressee within one or two days from the date of receipt of the postal cover.  But the post man who is 5^th opposite party without valid reason kept the article in the Branch Office up to 10.12.2013.  The above attitude of the 5^th opposite party amounts to deficiency in service.

11. The complainant received the admit card only on 10.12.2013 at 3.30 pm and therefore the complainant was unable to appear an interview on 10.12.2013 at 8.00 am.  Therefore the complainant requested the Deputy Inspector General, CISF (south zone) to admit him for physical test for some other date.  Ex.A4 is the copy of legal notice.  But the officer of the CSIF refused to grant further opportunity for participating in the process of recruitment.  Ex.A6 is the copy of reply to the notice in which the recruitment officer clearly stated that the department will not be responsible for the postal delays and candidate may check CISF website from time to time for updating information.  Therefore the information regarding date of physical test may be watched in the website of the CISF, but the complainant has not utilized the opportunity to check the CISF website and to find out the date of physical test. But the complainant failed to check the CISF website. Therefore the complainant cannot blame the postal Department for the lost of opportunity in getting post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Steno) in CISF.  On the other hand, it is the duty of the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties to deliver the postal cover to the complainant without any delay. The 5^th opposite party who is the post man under the control of the 6^th to 8^th opposite parties and hence the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties jointly and severally are liable for the deficiency of service committed by the 5^th opposite party. Because of the delay in delivery of the postal cover, the complainant suffered mental agony and financial loss.  Therefore there is deficiency in service on the part of the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties and the complainant is entitled for compensation and cost. Thus the point No.1 & 2 are answered accordingly.

12. Point No.3:-

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  Accordingly the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties are jointly and severally hereby directed to pay sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) towards compensation for causing mental agony and financial loss to the complainant due to non delivery of the postal letter to the complainant in time and also to pay sum of Rs.1000/-(Rupees one thousand only) towards cost of litigation to the complainant.  This complaint against the 1^st to 4^th opposite parties is dismissed as not pressed on 13.10.2014.

The above said amount shall be  payable by the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties  within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which, this said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of payment.

Dictated by the president to the steno-typist and transcribed and computerized by him and corrected by the president and pronounced by us in the open forum of this 23^rd October 2019.

     -Sd-                                                           -Sd-                                                     -Sd-

MEMBER-II                                              MEMBER-I                                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed by the complainant:-

List of documents filed by the 5^th to 8^th opposite parties:-

 -Sd-                                                           -Sd-                                                     -Sd-

MEMBER-II                                              MEMBER-I                                        PRESIDENT