BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 144 of 2020.
Date of Institution : 02.07.2020.
Date of Decision : 23.11.2022.
Ananya Sachdeva aged about 10 years minor daughter of Shri Shyam Lal Sachdeva son of Shri Shankar Dass, through Shri Shyam Lal Sachdeva being her father & natural guardian resident of House No.57, Sector-20, Part-I, HUDA, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, SCO No.28-32, Sector-34A, Chandigarh- 160022.
2. Incharge Passport Sewa Kendra, Head Post Office, Sirsa.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (as amended under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019).
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA …………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. Raghav Arora, Advocate for complainant.
Opposite party no.1 already exparte.
Sh. Kuldeep Bishnoi, PA for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. The complainant has averred that she is a minor, hence complaint is being filed through her father and natural guardian who has no adverse interest towards the minor complainant. It is further averred that complainant is consumer of the ops. The complainant through his father had applied to ops through online portal (M-Passport Sewa App) for the issuance of the Passport and had paid requisite application amount of Rs.1000/- to the op through online alongwith application on 28.04.2019. The application of complainant was registered with the op at Sr. No. CH21C4077809019 and having AR No.19-0005879450. The complainant had supplied the relevant documents to the ops alongwith application. It is further averred that after receipt of application and other required documents, the op no.1 directed the complainant to appear in person before the op no.2 alongwith all original documents i.e. Adhar Card, Birth certificate, ration card, photographs etc. for verification on 14.06.2019 at 10.00 a.m. Accordingly, the complainant had appeared before the office of op no.2 on 14.06.2019 at the relevant time. The op no.2 had verified the relevant documents, but he put a query. After removal of such query, the complainant again appeared in person before op no.2 after availing the appointment i.e. on 17.07.2019 at 10.45 a.m. The op no.2 again verified the relevant required documents and had also obtained photographs as well as finger prints of the complainant. It is further averred that after completing all the formalities, the op no.2 found the entire documents of complainant OK and had assured the complainant that they are sending the complete data to its regional office at Chandigarh from where she will get issued her passport. The op no.2 also directed the complainant that as soon as the passport of complainant is issued, the same shall be dispatched to her through registered post on her address. That thereafter, the complainant had kept watching the ops. However, the complainant thereafter has paid three four visits to the office op no.2 to enquire about the status/ fate of the application. On very visit, the op no.2 asked that there is no query in the case of the complainant and their higher authorities are proceeding with the case of the complainant and she will get her passport within a short span. It is further averred that in the first week of June, 2020 she was stunned to see the letter issued by op no.1 which bears the date of issue 3rd March, 2020 but has been received by complainant in the first week of June, 2020 vide which they have closed the case of complainant with the reason “In the absence of any response from your side till date your file has been closed”. However, the entire documents as well as case of complainant was found OK by the op no.2 and ops never put any query or objection over it but now the ops have closed the file of complainant without assigning any plausible reason. That op no.1 has closed the case file of complainant without giving any prior notice or opportunity of being heard. It is further averred that after receipt of letter dated 03.03.2020, the complainant approached to the office of op no.2 but he did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and has threatened the complainant not to visit his office again and told that if she require passport, she may apply a fresh. That complainant had become a victim of deceptive trade practice of the ops and has been harassed badly by them as they are working in connivance with each other and complainant has been making series of round to get her passport. The ops have acted unfairly and thus, the ops are gross negligent in their duty and have failed to provide proper service to the complainant. It is further averred that due to lackadaisical attitude of the ops and non providing of proper service to the complainant, she has suffered harassment and great mental pain and financial loss of Rs.1,50,000/-. Hence, this complaint seeking direction to the ops to issue the passport in her name with immediate effect on the earlier application and fee and to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation for harassment and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs of the complaint.
3. Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties. Initially, Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Junior Passport Assistant appeared on behalf of op no.1 but thereafter none appeared on behalf of op no.1. Since Quorum was not complete on that occasion, fresh notice was ordered to be issued against op no.1. However, op no.1 failed to appear despite notice sent through registered cover and delivery report and as such op no.1 was proceeded against exparte. Thereafter, Sh. Amit Goyal, Advocate appeared on behalf op no.1 and sought an adjournment for filing application for setting aside exparte order. However, no application in this regard was moved on behalf of op no.1 despite several adjournments and as such op no.1 remained exparte.
4. Op no.2 appeared and filed written version taking preliminary submissions that Post Office Passport Seva Kendra (POPSK) has been established with the collective efforts of Department of Posts, India and Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India wherein the liability of the Post Office has been restricted to provide suitable space/ accommodation, connectivity, equipments and man power of two operators only (postal Assistants). The day to day operations of POPSK are under the direct control & supervision of the officers of RPO Chandigarh, Ministry of External Affairs and there is no such liability of Department of Posts in such process or issuing passport. Further, the whole record is being maintained by the Passport authorities. Further preliminary objections are also taken that there is no locus standi, the complainant is not a consumer of Department of Posts, in view of preliminary submissions and as the Department is just providing service and not charging fee from the customer, therefore, she is not covered as customer under COPRA. Hence, the complaint is not maintainable against answering op.
5. On merits, it is submitted that contents of para no.1 to 4 and 7 of the complaint relate to op no.1 i.e. RPO, Chandigarh. The contents of paras no.5 and 6 are denied whereas contents of para no.8 are admitted. It is also submitted that contents of para no.9 of complaint are legal whereas no comments are given to para no.10 of complaint for want of knowledge. With these averments, dismissal of complaint qua op no.2 prayed for.
6. The complainant led evidence by way of affidavit and document. Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate father of complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 and letter dated 3.3.2020 Ex.C2.
7. On the other hand, a statement was made on behalf of op no.2 that written statement filed on behalf of op no.2 may be read as evidence on behalf of op no.2.
8. We have heard learned counsel for complainant as well as Sh. Kuldeep Bishnoi, Postal Assistant on behalf of op no.2 and have perused the case file carefully.
9. The case of the complainant is that on 28.04.2019 she applied for issuance of passport through her father to the op no.1 through online portal and had paid requisite fee of Rs.1000/- and also supplied relevant documents to the ops alongwith application. Thereafter, op no.1 directed the complainant to appear in person before the op no.2 alongwith all original documents i.e. adhar card, birth certificate, ration card and photographs etc. for verification on 14.06.2019 at 10.00 a.m. Accordingly on 14.06.2019 she appeared before the office of op no.2 at the relevant time and op no.2 had verified the relevant documents but raised a query. It is further alleged that after removal of said query, the complainant again appeared in person before op no.2 after availing the appointment for 17.07.2019 and op no.2 again verified the relevant required documents and had also obtained photographs as well as finger prints of the complainant. It is further case of complainant that after completion of all the formalities, the op no.2 found the entire documents of complainant OK and had assured her that they are sending the complete data to op no.1 from where she will get issued her passport. The complainant thereafter waited for the passport and also paid three four visits to the office of op no.2 but every time she was told that there is no query in the case of complainant and she will be issued passport. However, in the first week of June, 2020 she received a letter from op no.1 which is of dated 3.3.2020 and vide which they have closed the case file of complainant with the above said remarks.
10. The complainant has also placed on file copy of said letter dated 3.3.2020 of op no.1 received by her in the month of June, 2020 and vide this letter it was informed to the complainant that in absence of any response from her side till date, her file has been closed and appropriate notice has also been placed on the website. She was further intimated that she may however apply for a fresh passport with all the documents and required fees anytime at the Passport Seva Kendra near place of present residence, but will have to quote the previous file number at the appropriate places in the relevant forms. However, the op no.1 has not mentioned in this letter that what was to be complied by the complainant and what type of response has not been given by the complainant. The op no.1 was liable to make clear in its letter that what formality/ response has to be given by op no.1 for issuance of passport and should not have directly closed the file of the complainant. Even the op no.1 despite appearance on earlier occasion has failed to disclose the requirement to be completed by the complainant and reason of closing of file of complainant and ultimately opted to be proceeded against exparte. Therefore, op no.1 is required to reopen the file of the complainant of her application dated 28.04.2019 and to tell to the complainant what requirement by complainant for issuance of the passport has been left and is to be performed by complainant. However, no liability of op no.2 is made out.
11. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we allow the present complaint against opposite party no.1 and direct the opposite party no.1 to immediately reopen the file of the complainant of her application dated 28.04.2019 and to disclose to the complainant the remaining requirement of the op no.1 to be completed by complainant. OP no.1 is further directed to issue passport to the complainant on the fee already deposited by her within 15 days from the date of remaining compliance by the complainant. In case op no.1 fails to issue pass port to the complainant even after fulfillment of their requirement by the complainant, the complainant will be entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 71/72 of the Act against op no.1 for non compliance. However, complaint qua op no.2 stands dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 23.11.2022. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
