This C.C coming on before us for final hearing, on 6-11-2008 in the presence of Sri.P.Amarchand, Advocate for Complainant, and in the presence of Sri. K.Prabhakar Rao, Advocate for the opposite party No-1&2&3 ; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-
ORDER
(Per Sri.K.V.Kaladhar, Member )
1. This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the following averments;
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant completed his Degree in the year 2001 and he belongs to backward class, Group:D and he comes under reservation as per the Central Government Rules. The complainant having been attracted to the publication published by the Railway Recruitment Board offering the applications for the post of “Railway Goods Guard”. There are 58 vacancies for the said post and the complainant applied by complying all the requirements of the Railway Recruitment Board along with documents and Indian Postal orders on 24-1-07. The complainant had sent the application for the said post on 28-1-2007 through ordinary post and the same has to reach the Assistant Secretary, Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad on or before 12-2-2007. The said cover was reached to the opposite party No-1 on 5-2-2007. But the said cover was kept with the opposite party No-1 till the last date and sent the same on last date to the Railway Recruitment Board authorities who have refused the cover and the opposite party No-1 returned the cover to the complainant on 26-2-2007.
3. It is submitted that the opposite party No-1 willfully neglected to deliver the application within time. Due to this the complainant was unable to attend the examination and as a result he lost the said post. The complainant is very young, energetic and intelligent person. If he attended the written examination he would definitely got the said job. The complainant age also barring by the year of 2008 for applying the Central Government post. The complainant suffered great mental agony for the negligent act of the opposite parties and he is entitled to damages from the opposite parties. Hence this complaint to direct the opposite parties to provide job to the complainant or to direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages to the complainant and to grant any other relief.
4. The complainant filed his affidavit along with the following documents :
Ex A1:Ordinary post cover address to the Assistant Secretary, Railway recruitment Board, Secunderabad. Ex A2: Xerox copy of postal orders2 in number Ex A3: Application form of the complainant. Ex A4:Information sheet of the complainant.Ex A5 OBC Declaration Ex A6: Xerox copy of SSC marks of the complainant.Ex A7: Xerox copy of Intermediate marks of the complainant Ex A8: Xerox copy of Degree marks of the complainant.
4. Opposite party filed the following counter:
The complainant alleged that he had sent the application cover on 28-1-07 through ordinary post and the said cover was kept with opposite party till the last date 12-2-07 which is false. All the ordinary letters posted will be dispatched on the same day itself to Khammam RMS office. That the opposite party No-1 is a dispatching office only and delivery office is Secunderabad jurisdiction. It is submitted that it is an application for the post to the RRB, Secunderabad and as such there is no guarantee that he would certainly get job. The argument of the complainant is an imaginary one.
As per section 6 Indian Post office act, the Department is exempted from liability for loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage to the article in the course of transmission. The department shall not incur any liability by reasons of the loss, mis-delivery or delay 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 hereafter 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.
The Hon’ble National Commission in its order RP.No.175/92 and 247/92 observed that the services rendered by the Post Office are merely statutory and there is no contractual liability. Establishing the post offices and running the Postal service the Central Government performs the Governmental function and the Government does not engage in commercial transaction with the sender of the article through post and the charges for the article transmitted by post as in the nature of charges imposed by the state for the employment of the facilities provided by the Postal Department and not in consideration of any commercial contract. The post office cannot be equate with a common carrier and the Hon’ble National Commission allowed the revision petitions and dismissed the complainants.
Hence it is prayed the Hon’ble Forum may be pleased to dismiss the above cc in the interest of justice.
5. The point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled as prayed for?
6. It is the contention of the complaint he completed his degree in the year 2001 and he belongs to backward class, Group BC-D and he comes under reservation as per the Central Government Rules. The complainant applied for the post of “Railway Goods Guard” as there are 58 vacancies for the said post. The complainant applied for the said post and had sent the application form through ordinary post on 28-1-2007 to reach the Assistant Secretary, Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad on or before 12-2-07. The said cover was reached to opposite party No-1 on 5-2-2007. But the said cover was kept with the opposite party No-1 till the last date and sent the application to the addressee on the last date which was refused by the Railway Recruitment Board and it was returned to the complainant on 26-2-2007. Due to this he lost the opportunity to right the examination and lost the hope of getting job. It is also the contention of the complainant that the complainant age also barring by the year of 2008 for applying the Central Government post. As such he is entitled towards damages.
7. For this the contention of the opposite parties that all the ordinary letters posted will be dispatched on the same day itself to Khammam RMS Office that the opposite party No-1 is a dispatching office only and delivery office is Secunderabad jurisdiction. And it is also their contention that the opposite parties that the complainant sent the application form for written test only and there is no guarantee that he would certainly get job. The opposite parties are also pleading that as per section-6 Indian post office act they are exempted from any liability.
8. It is a fact that complainant completed his degree and it is also a fact that the complainant sent an application form through ordinary post to the Railway Recruitment Board as per Ex A1. It is also a fact instead of sending the cover to Railway Recruitment Board the opposite parties handedover the unserved cover to the complainant. It is the contention of the opposite party No-1 that the said cover dispatched on the same day and delivery office was Secunderabad jurisdiction. After perusing the counter of the opposite parties No-1 to 3 the opposite party No-2 only filed this counter and signed. This Forum sent the notices to opposite party No-1 to opposite party No-3, the notices served on opposite party No-1 &2 but the notice of opposite party No-3 returned un served. We have perused the un served cover of the opposite party No-3. There is no mention on this cover why it was not served on opposite party No-3. It is the contention of the opposite party No-1 that the cover was dispatched on the same day itself and delivery office secunderabad jurisdiction. But opposite party No-3 is silent in this aspect even though Government Pleader filed memo for opposite party No-1 to 3 and the counter is filed by opposite party No-2 only, even though it was mentioned that the counter was filed by opposite party No-1 to 3. The complainant came with the specific allegation that the cover was kept with the opposite party No-1 till the last date and sent application to the addressee on the last date and the Railway Recruitment Board authorities refused the cover and the opposite party No-1 returned the cover to the complainant on 26-2-07. In this aspect the counter did not speak anything. Moreover they claimed protection under section -6 of Indian Post Office Act.
9. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that the opposite parties defaulted in delivering the cover to the Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad and due to which the complainant lost the opportunity to right exam conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad. It is also fact that the complainant age also barring by the year 2008 for applying the Central Government post. It is true that the postal department does not engage in commercial transaction but it is the duty to dispatch the letters properly and without any default.
10. Hence, we are of the opinion that the opposite parties are negligent and default in delivering the cover to the Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabd. However the complainant claimed Rs.5,00,000/- without any basis just because he applied for the post of “Railway Goods Guard”. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that Rs.10,000/- towards damages for the complainant will meet the ends of justice.
11. In the result, the C.C. is allowed. We direct the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards damages to the complainant.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Corrected and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this 19th day of November, 2008.
President Member Member
District Consumers Forum, Khammam
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESS EXAMINED FOR
Complainant Opposite parties
Nil Nil
DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR
Complainant
Ex A1:Ordinary post cover address to the Assistant Secretary, Railway recruitment Board, Secunderabad.
Ex A2: Xerox copy of postal orders2 in number
Ex A3: Application form of the complainant.
Ex A4:Information sheet of the complainant.
Ex A5 :OBC Declaration
Ex A6: Xerox copy of SSC marks of the complainant.
Ex A7: Xerox copy of Intermediate marks of the complainant
Ex A8: Xerox copy of Degree marks of the complainant.
Opposite parties
Nil
President Member Member
District Consumers Forum, Khammam
