SRI BIJAYA KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-
Deficiency in service in respect of delayed delivery of Speed post letter is the allegation arrayed against the Opp.Parties.
2. Complaint petition in brief reveals that complainant being an unemployed educated person applied for a vacant post to Bhumishree Agro Pvt. Ltd., the last date for submission of application form was dtd. 24.02.2015 as per the advertisement. Complainant applied for the said post through Regd. Speed post on dtd.20.02.15 from OP No.1(Pattamundai Sub-post office) vide Speed Post Receipt No. E0696780077IN to the employer Bhumishree Agro Pvt.Ltd.,Bhubaneswar. But the letter sent through the Speed post reached on the destination on dtd.27.02.15 after the expiry of last date of filing of application form. It is the allegation of the complainant that if the job application sent through Speed post could have been reached in time. The complainant might have successful and able to get the said job. The delayed delivery of speed post letter by OP-Department caused complainant the loss of job and the acts of the Ops gave financial loss and mental agony and claims Rs.90,000/- as compensation amount of mental agony, financial loss and cost of litigation. The cause of action of the present case arose on dtd.20.02.15 when the complainant dispatched the speed post letter from office of OP No.1.
3. Being noticed OPs appeared through their Ld.Counsel Mr. Md. Nayeem and filed written statement into the dispute partially denying the allegations and submitting the facts it is stated that complainant booked a speed post letter on dtd.20.02.15 from Pattamundai MDG which was dispatched on the same to NSH(National Sorting Hub),Bhubaneswar. On dtd.21.02.15 the article was dispatched to Khandagiri SO,Bhubaneswar which is the delivery post office of article. As the regular postman was on leave the postman entrusted to delivery of post articles was an outsider and could not locate the place of delivery of the article and kept the said article till dtd. 26.02.15 with postal remark ‘Inquiry’. It is revealed that after joining of regular postman the article was delivered on dtd.27.02.15. As per the Postal Deptt. Memo No.BDD/Delivery/01/96 dtd. 19.12.96(Annexure-R/1) reveals that in case of a speed post article not delivered in the second attempt, the same will be kept in the delivery office for a period of 6 days, thereafter the articles will be returned to sender indicating the reasons for non-delivery. It is further revealed from the written statement that such delayed delivery of complainant’s speed post letter is not intentional on the otherhand Ops had taken all possible attempts to deliver the article in time. Ops also cited a decision of the Hon’ble Dist.CDR Forum,Puri in C.C.Case No.338 of 2013 where the Hon’ble Forum dismiss the complaint against the OP-Deptt. on application of Sec.6 of Indian Post Office Act,1898. On the above circumstances, the Ops have not committed any deficiency in service and payment of compensation does not arise at all.
4. Heard the arguments advanced by Ld. Counsels for the parties,perused the documents filed into the dispute. It is an admitted fact that complainant booked a speed post article on dtd.20.02.15 from Pattamundai Sub-post office(OP No.1) and said letter was delivered to the addressee at Bhubaneswar on dtd.27.02.15. The grievance of the complainant that to get a job in Bhumishree Agro Pvt. Ltd.,Bhubaneswar, he sent the application form on dtd.20.02.15 from OP No.1 Post office and the last date of submission of application form was dtd. 24.02.15, but the said letter reached before the employer on dt.27.02.15, for which he could not availed the opportunity to get the job. The delayed delivery of the application form deprived him for getting a job for which he claimed compensation for mental agony, financial loss and other expenses.
Ops countering the allegations but admitting the facts of date of booking of letter and date of delivery of letter, it is the plea of the Ops that the delayed delivery of the said letter is not an intentional act of the Ops. As the regular postman of the beat was in leave the postman in-charge engaged on daily wages basis could not trace the location to deliver the article. It is the further plea of the Ops that as per departmental guidelines the Ops can kept speed post article for six(6) days after the ‘second’ attempt is failed to deliver the letter. Considering the contentions of the parties, it is to be decided by this Forum that whether delivery of a speed post letter taking a time 7 days to cover a 100 kms distance can be treated as a deficiency in service or not ?
It is the plea of the Ops that due to absence of the regular postman the said speed post letter could not be delivered and as per the departmental guidelines and after joining of regular postman the letter was delivered. Equally, it is clear that when the allegations of delayed delivery as alleged by the complainant is not intentional as the said letter has been despatched from the booking office on the same day. If there is any delay in delivery, this is not an willful act of the Ops. The fact is the address of delivery of disputed letter is not on individual, but a Pvt. Company which must have its sign board or advertisement board to locate their office. If the postman in-charge of the delivery of letter can not identify a pvt. Ltd. Company, such type of persons should not encouraged to entrust with the work of delivery of letters which are urgent in nature. Considering the official guidelines, circular we are of the opinion that though the Ops are not totally responsible for delayed delivery,but they are partially liable for the same. Further the Ops have not taken the specific provision of Sec.6 of Indian Post Offices Act,1898 in their written version. Though the same is reflected in the judgment of DCDRF, Puri as filed by the facts of the case are different from the present dispute and the decision of a Forum is not binding on another Forum. Ops and that apart ‘speed post’ service is a special service provided to customers of Ops expecting a timely and guaranteed delivery, which the Ops have not complied on the instant case for whatsoever reason.
As we have observed/discussed earlier the acts of the Ops definitely gives loss and mental agony to the complainant by not delivering the article in time by which complainant lost an opportunity to attend the job interview.
Complainant claims a very huge amount towards compensation for delayed delivery, and the compensation claimed is without any basis and complainant failed to prove that Ops have any animosity with complainant and subject matter of the disputed letter is unknown to the Ops when it remains with a sealed cover. However, complainant who is a unemployed educated youth did not get an opportunity to sit on the interview deserves sympathy of this Forum.
Hence, it is directed that Ops will return the booking amount of speed post article of complainant of dtd.20.02.15 and pay a compensation of Rs.1000/-(Rupees One thousand)only as mental agony,Rs.300/-(Rupees Three hundred)only as cost of litigation. The Ops will carry out the order within one month of receipt of this order, failing which 9 per cent interest will be charged for the delayed period in total ordered amount.
Complaint is allowed in part on contest with cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 20th January.2016.
