DHARAM PAL Vs. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff Dharam Pal was appointed as a sweeper under RBI vide appointment letter dated 14.5.1990. He worked till 25.10.2000 and claims that his services were illegally terminated. He could not find suitable employment and appears to be a person who takes things very casually in life. Probably, his social upbringing was such that he does not even bother to inform his family members what he is doing. This behaviour of his, unfortunately for him, constitutes a part of the cause which has necessitated the present suit.

(2.) Dharam Pal claims that in early March, without informing his family, he went to Moradabad to visit his maternal uncle. Admittedly, on 16.3.2002 vide Exhibit P-1 defendant wrote a letter to Dharam Pal's wife requesting her to collect some dues payable to Dharam Pal. The said letter referred to Dharam Pal as (Late Dharam Pal).

(3.) According to the plaintiff since his family had not heard about him, his wife, an uneducated lady believed the communication sent by his ex-employer. He claims that she believed that the defendant must have made proper inquiries before writing the letter and referring to her husband as a dead person. She informed the other family members. There was sorrow and mourning in the house and the atmosphere was one of sadness. Everybody started crying and weeping. Mother of Dharam Pal aged 59 years is stated to have suffered a stroke and almost escaped death. Thereafter, relatives, family friends and fellow members of the caste to which the plaintiff belongs are stated to have impressed upon his wife to observe the 13th day ceremony when a person dies. This ceremony 'terahvi' is stated to have been performed. Dharam Pal claims to have returned to his house. To the utter shock of the family, they thought that a ghost has come. He claims that since he was publicly proclaimed dead, persons in the neighbourhood and his friends started subjecting him to ridicule and he became a butt of jokes. He was referred to as a ghost. He caused a communication to be sent to the Reserve Bank inquiring about the circumstances under which he was referred to as a dead person. Reply Ex. P-2 was sent on 8.4.2002 wherein expressing regret for the letter dated 16.3.2002, RBI wrote that by mistake (trutivash) he was referred to in the letter as late, believing that he had died (Aapko mrit samajh kar).