Orissa

Jajapur

CC/79/2016

Girish Kanta Jena - Complainant(s)

Versus

Post Master,Mashra Subpost Office,Mashra. - Opp.Party(s)

15 May 2017

ORDER

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.

                                              Dated the 15th day of  May,2017.

                                                      C.C.Case No.79 of 2016

Girish kanta Jena  S/O Muralidhar Jena

Vill. Dadhibabanpur (Suradiha),P.Binjharpur

Dist.-Jajpur.At present_Sribanatapur High School

At/P.O.Mashra,Via.Binjharpur,Dist.Jajpur .                                                   …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       .

                   (Versus)

1. Post Master,Mashra Sub-post office,Mashra ,at/P.O.Mashra,

    P.S.Binjharpur, Dist.Jajpur

2.Superintendent of post offices, Cuttack North Division, Cuttack.

                                                                                                                             ……………..Opp.Parties.                  

For the Complainant:                           Self.

For the Opp.Parties :                           Sri Ajay Ku.Das, Advocate .

                                                                                                     

SHRI  JIBAN BALLAV DAS , PRESIDENT.                                         Date of order:   15.05.2017.

       The brief facts of the petitioner’s case is that,  the petitioner opened a savings account in the name of his minor son Sandeep kumar Jena bearing A/C No.435598. When his minor son attained  majority the petitioner deposited the pass book in the Mashra sub post office  on 06.05.14 to change the minor account into major account holder . At that time  there was deposited cash of Rs.18,000/- in the said pass book. From 06.05.14 till the date of filing of the case the petitioner ran to the sub- post office for about 100 times for getting his pass book but was hopeless and helpless. The petitioner went even to the extent of filing a complaint before the Superintendent of post offices, Cuttack North Division, Cuttack vide Regd.letter No.Ro6652601951 N dt.01.09.2016 .After being failed in his  attempt to get back his own deposit standing in the name of minor son and being deprived up gross deficiency of service by the postal Department ,the petitioner filed this complaint to ventilate his grievance .

           The O.P filed written version containing 8 pages wherein the O.p made mountain out of a mole hill .The O.P denying the averment of the petitioner,   submitted that the petitioner deposited the pass book at Mashra sub post office on 06.05.14 for converting the minor account into major account. The pass book was received at Jajpur Head post office on 10.05.14 and was returned to the petitioner on 20.05.14 with objection to supply fresh S.B-3 and KYC of the ex-minor. This pass book was received  from Mashra Sub post office at  Jajpur Head post office on 15.11.2014 but was again twice returned  to Mashra Sub post office with objection for attestation of the signature of the major by the guardian and then for countersignature and specimen verification by Sub post master Mashra Sub post office and lastly  the pass book was received on 15.11.2016 and the account was converted into major account in the name of  Sri Sandeep kumar Jena and was returned to Mashra Sub post office on 23.12.16 . The contesting O.P also filed relevant rule of savings Bank Order No.18/2010 vide Annexture-R/1 and R/ 2 . The crux of the objection of the O.P is that for conversion of pass book of minor to major,  it resulted in the  delay for which the sub post master vide letter no.RO665260195IN dt.01.09.16 was instructed to dispose of the matter as soon as possible. Further more the delay occurred  in conversion of the account from minor to major due to absence of Sri Sandeep Jena to attend to Mashra Sub post office to comply the objection raised at Jajpur Head post office .

            After going through the written version of the O.P it transpires that though prompt steps was taken at Jajpur Head post office and Mashra sub post office for conversion of  the account from minor account to major account, the delay occurred due to non availability of Sandeep jena for compliance of the objection raised at Jajpur Head post office . So instead of admitting the delay the O.P tried to shift the cause of delay  on the son of the petitioner who was absent at the relevant time for conversion of the account from minor to major account. The sub-post master ,Mashra Sub post office has requested several times to the petitioner to take delivery of the pass book which  he refused  to do and asked the Sub post master to keep the pass book with him until his Son comes from Kota, Rajsthan to take delivery .Therefore, the contention of O.P that   there was no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. Hence no cause of action to file  such a dispute before this Fora.

            On the above pleadings of the parties the points for consideration is whether there was deficiency of service on the part of the O.P.

            Heard the parties and the learned counsel for the O.P at length in the matter. No doubt the matter was brought to the notice to the sub-post office Mashra on 06.05.14 for converting  the pass book from minor to major and this case was filed on 17.11.16 . As revealed from the written version the pass book was converted to major account to Sandeep Jena and was returned to Mashra sub post office on 23.12.16 which is after filing of this dispute on 17.11.16. This clearly shows that after the complainant knocked the door of this Fora  ,the O.P over right hastened to resolve the dispute and submitted the pass book to Mashra sub post office on 23.12.16 which is an admission.

            Post and  Telegraph Department is a  public utility  service concern . The bureaucratic  red-tepasim should not have been crept into a Department which is involved in the service of general public in day to day basis. The instant case is an example of functioning of postal Telegraph Department at the grass route level most specifically in the rural area, so the service provider shoud be more vigilant to the woes of the general public. After hearing the argument,  there is no doubt  that the O.P  was negligent in performing the duty in time which resulted in not providing the prompt service to the petitioner, so this is the clear case of deficiency of service.

Further more due to lack of due care and attention of the problem/ grievance of the petitioner, there was negligence on the part of the O.P which amounted to denial of service in time which includes dis-service and deficiency of service . Last but not least the O.P became smart only after the case was filed . So we conclude that there was no prompt service on the part of the O.P which a service provider of Central Government.

Hence this Order

            For the forgoing observations , the case of the petitioner is allowed against the O.P on contest. The O.P is directed to pay the litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/-(two thousand) to the complainant within one month of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to realize the same through the process of  court of law.

            A copy of this order be sent to Post Mater General Orissa, Bhubaneswar for future guidance  and vigilance in the matter as it is said a eternal vigilance is the price of liberty .                     

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 15th day of May,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.