The case of the complainant is that his son had applied for a post. The last date for applying for the post was 5.3.2021. The complainant dispatched his Application through Speed Post vide Number 634052860 on 1.3.2021 at 11.22 P.M. from Post Office, Budhlada. It is alleged that the said speed post was delivered at the destination after the last date of applying  for the post. The complainant has submitted that the OPs have made the future of his child dark due to their negligence. Alleging this is a deficiency, the complainant has prayed that appropriate action be taken against the OPs. Hence this complaint.

The defence of OPs is that due to pandemic of the Covid-19, maximum trains were cancelled and it was not possible to work in ordinary manner. It was impossible to deliver the articles at their destinations in time. 

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file very carefully.

It is an admitted fact that the article was booked from Budhlada on 1.3.2021 . Exhibit C-2 shows that the article was received at Budhlada on 1.3.2021. The article was to send Sangrur. The last date of applying for the post was 5.3.2021. But the article was not delivered at its destination before the said last date. Exhibit C-3 is a copy of postal receipt. It shows that the article was returned to the complainant by one Som Ram (Beat No.B1) on 15.3.2021. The OPs have not explained that why the article was not delivered at its destination, but the same was returned to complainant after 12 days.   The only dispute in the present case is that whether OPs can be held liable to pay compensation for this delay ? 

Learned counsel for OPs argued that Section 6 of the Post Office Act, 1898 grants complete immunity to the government for mis delivery or delay. Post Offices are protected by Section 6 of the Post Office Act, which reads as under:

“6. Exemption from liability for loss, mis delivery,  delay or damage. The government shall not incur  any liability by reason of the loss, mis delivery or  delay of, or damage to, any postal article in course  of transmission  by post except in so far as such  liability may in express terms be undertaken by the  Central Government as hereinafter provided, and  no officer of the Post Office shall incur any  liability by reason of any such loss, mis-delivery,  delay or damage, unless he has caused the same  fraudulently or by his willful act or default.”

It was emphasized that by sending a letter or handing over a packet at the Post Office for transmitting it to the addressee, the sender does not enter into any contract with the Government. He actually avails the services statutorily provided by the Government.

Hon'ble Natinal Commission in  “The Post Master Vs. Dr. Jamini Devi Sagolband”. 2000(1)CLT 577 had held that;

“the complainant was not entitled to any relief in view of  the Section '6' of India Postal Act which grant complete  immunity to the Government from liability for loss, mis- delivery, delay or damage to any postal articles until or  unless it is proved that the loss was caused fraudulently  by any officer of the Post office.

In the present case, there is no allegation that the Post Master or the Superintendent is guilty of fraud or willful act or willful default which led to delayed delivery of the said postal article. An officer of the post office may be held liable for any loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage, if it can be proved that he has caused such loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage by some fraudulent act or willful act or default. In other words, the person who has committed the offence can be sued for damage but no action will lie against either the Central Government or any of its officers vicariously for the willful act or default of the dealing clerk or postal peon. In this case no evidence has been brought by the complainant against any officer. So in the absence of the evidence, no relief can be granted against any officer of the department.  

In view of above the case law and discussion, the present complaint has no merits and the same stands dismissed. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost under the rules and file be indexed and consigned to record.