Adv. For the Complainant: - Sri P.K.Mishra, P.K.Nagi
Adv. For O.P :- Sri S.K.Mishra
Date of filing of the Case :- 12.06.2018
Date of Order :-10.12.2019
JUDGMENT
Sri A.K.Purohit, President,
1. The complainant has preferred this case alleging deficiency in postal service. The case of the complainant is that, she had applied for the post of Central Notary Public and upon consideration of her application the authority had sent her an intimation letter by speed post for an interview which was scheduled to be held on 18.5.2018 at 9 AM onwards. The complainant received the said intimation letter on dated 22.5.18, i.e. after the interview date. On inquiry the complainant found that, the letter was dispatch by the Ministry of Law and Justice Dept. on dated 10.5.2018 but she has received the same after 12 days that is on dated 22.5.18. The complainant alleges that, although the intimation letter was sent to her by speed post with correct address there was delayed delivery by the O.Ps for which she was debarred from the interview and sustain loss and hence the complainant has preferred this case claiming compensation.
2. The O.Ps have contested the case by filing their version jointly. Besides preliminary objection the O.Ps. have submitted that, the O.P.3 who was in duty for delivery of Beat No. 9 was on leave from 10.5.18 to 21.5.18 and the postman who was in charge of the said beat was unable to trace out the residence of the complainant and hence the letter was delivered to the complainant on dated 22.5.18 after O.P.3 resume to his duty. Further the O.Ps. have submitted that as per sec. 6 of the Indian Post Office Act the O.Ps are not liable for any delayed delivery of postal article and only the sender may lodge complaint relating to the postal article. The O.Ps. have claim no deficiency in service on their part.
3. Heard both the parties. Perused the documentary evidence available on record. In support her case the complainant has filed Xerox copy of delivery manifest of O.P.3, Xerox copy of track consignment and Xerox copy of one side of postal article received by the complainant. On the other hand the O.Ps. have filed Xerox copy of order book of Post Master, Xerox copy of duty performed by other Postman and Xerox copy of tracking report.
4. Before going into the merits of the case the learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of the O.Ps. raised a preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the case and submitted that, the complainant is not the sender of the postal article and she has not paid any consideration amount for the dispatch of the same and hence the complainant is not a consumer and this complaint petition is not maintainable.
5. Coming to the maintainability of the case, it is an admitted fact that the complainant is not the sender of the letter. It is also an admitted fact that the letter was addressed to the complainant which has to be delivered to the complainant by the O.P. In Para- 3 of the written version the O.Ps. have not denied that, the letter is for the interview of the complainant. Therefore the complainant is a beneficiary to receive the said letter and she had paid all required fees to the dispatcher for sending the interview letter by speed post. Hence the complaint case is maintainable.
6. Coming to the merits of the case, the learned A.G.P. relying on the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission in Rev. Petition No. 4567 of 2012 Sr. Superintendent of Post Vrs. Dharamveer Harijan submitted that, the O.Ps. are not liable for the delayed dispatch of the postal article in terms of Sec.6 of the Indian Post Office Act 1898. Further the learned A.G.P. submitted that even if there was any delay in the delivery of the letter it is due to the leave of the O.P.3 for Beat no.9.
7. On perusal of the documentary evidence available on record it is seen that, the letter was dispatch to the complainant by speed post and the same was booked on dated 10.5.2018 at New Delhi which was received by the Balangir H.O. on dated 16.5.18. and the same was delivered to the complainant on dated 22.5.2018, i.e. after 12 days of booking of the letter. Speed post is a service of the postal department for speed delivery and for which the department is charging more fees. Therefore delivery of the speed post letter after 12 days from the date of booking can not be said to be fair and the same is a negligent act of the O.Ps. The stand taken by the O.Ps. that the reason for delayed delivery is due to the absent of O.P.3 can not be believed for the simple reason that the Postman who is in charge of the beat of O.P.3 has not taken any interest to delivered the letter and simply he has waited O.P.3 till he resume on his duty. The Balangir H.O. has received the booked item on dated 16.5.18 but has not taken any step for immediate delivery of the letter. The O.Ps. have also not produce any affidavit evidence of the in charge Postman to explain the circumstances for the delay in delivery. This is the negligence act of the O.Ps. which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.
8. The cited decision is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the cited decision there is no evidence to show that, the loss was caused fraudulently or by postman’s willful act of default. But in the present case the complainant has proved that there is willful neglect of the postman and the Balangir H.O. has also not taken proper care to delivered the letter immediately after receipt of the same on dated 16.5.18. Therefore in the present case Sec.6 of the Indian Post Office Act is not a bar for the negligent act of the O.Ps.
9. Under the aforesaid material available on record and under the aforesaid discussion it is concluded that, due to the negligent act of the O.Ps. the complainant debarred from appearing in the interview and is entitled to compensation. The complainant is a practicing advocate and has assessed the loss for Rs.5,00,000/-. However on considereation and under the circumstances award of Rs. 2 Lakhs towards compensation will meet the ends of justice Hence ordered:-
ORDER
The O.Ps. are directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- (Two lakhs) towards compensation and cost within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount shall bear an interest @ 9% P.A. till payment.
Accordingly the case is disposed of.
Pronounced in the open Forum to-day the 10th day of December 2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
(S.Rath) (A.K.Purohit)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT
