BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Complaint no.245/18.
Date of instt.: 04.10.2018.
Date of Decision: 13.03.2019
Priyanka Joshi D/o Jagdish Chander Joshi R/O Gali No.20 Ward No.7 Ekta Nagari Chautala Road, Near Bikaner Hospital, Mandi Dabwali District Sirsa. ……….Complainant.
Versus
The Head Post Master, Head Post Office, Sirsa District Sirsa.
.……..Opposite Party.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA, PRESIDENT.
SH. ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL, MEMBER..
MRS. SUKHDEEP KAUR, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Kapil Dev, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Rajesh Arora, SDI on behalf of OP.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he had applied for the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Public Administration Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra by sending her application form vide registered post dated 01.08.2017 bearing OSTN No.06AAALP1403A1ZV and 13 digit articles No.EH335248296 dt. 01.08.2017. On 22.06.2018, concerned department had published a notification as well as on its website that her application has been rejected due to non-reaching to it within prescribed period. The complainant had sent the application well within time on 01.08.2017 but due to negligence on the part of OP, the same has been rejected resulting into loss of valuable time of the complainant for which she is entitled for compensation. The complainant got served legal notice upon the Op but no action has been taken. This way, the Op is deficient in service. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, the opposite party appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, cause of action and locus-standi etc. It has been submitted that under Clause-84 of Post office guide part-1 there is no legal responsibility for delay in delivery of article. The speed post article No.EH335248269IN was dispatched by Sirsa HO on the very same day of its booking to its destination and there is no fault of the post office and the question of late delivery of speed post does not arise at all. The complainant had not submitted her complaint within prescribe time limit of lodging complaint as per departmental rules, therefore, she is not entitled for any type of compensation. There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Op. The other contents of complaint are denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint has been made.
3. In support of her case, the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8. On the other hand, the Op tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.R1 and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5.
4. We have heard both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.
5. In order to prove her case, the complainant has tendered her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, wherein she has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint and she has also tendered documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8. On the other hand, the Op has tendered affidavit of Sh.Virendera Singh working as Superintendent of Post office, Hisar Division Hisar Ex.R1, wherein he has reiterated all the averments made in the reply and the Op has also tendered documents Ex.R2 to Ex.R5.
6. It is an undisputed fact that the complainant had sent her application form vide registered speed post on 01.08.2017 bearing OSTN No.06AAALP1403A1ZV and 13 digit articles No. EH335248269IN and the same was delivered to Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra on 07.08.2017. As per allegations of the complainant, the same was not delivered well within time, as a result thereof, her application was rejected by the authorities of Kurukshetra University and she has suffered mental agony and pain due to non-delivery of application form of the complainant. On the other hand, there is specific plea of the Op that the Op had delivered the letter of the complainant well in time.
7. During the course of arguments, the representative of the OP has produced attested copy of citizen charter which reveals that the delivery of the speed post article was to be made within 1 to 4 days, if same is within State. Since Sirsa and Kurukshetra are situated in the State of Haryana, as such, it was the legal obligation of the OP to deliver the article of the complainant within 4 days. The representative of the OP has stated at bar that it was Saturday on 05.08.2017 and Sunday on 06.08.2017 and the article could not be delivered on the date of holidays in the university, as such, same was delivered on 07.08.2017 to the University authority. Meaning thereby, it was delivered within a specific period of four working days. Learned counsel for the complainant has not denied this fact that the letter was dispatched on 01.08.2017 and same was not delivered on 07.08.2017. So, it appears from this document that the delivery was made within the stipulated period of four days excluding the holidays. So, the complaint does not appear to be maintainable and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Pronounced in open Forum. President,
Dated:11.03.2019. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
Member Member
DCDRF, Sirsa DCDRF, Sirsa
