POST MASTER, HEAD POST OFFICE Vs. SUSAMA PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant had sent one application for the post of Multipurpose Health Worker (Female) to the Chief District Officer, Balasore through Speed Post bearing No. EO 449928499 from Jagatsinghpur Head Post Office vide receipt No. 54103 dated 13.8.2012 on payment of Rs. 29/-, but the said application did not reach its destination i.e., CDMO Balasore. On 4.12.2012 the father of complainant filed one application before O.P. No. 1 regarding its non-delivery. After enquiry it was informed that the said Speed Post was wrongly delivered to CDMO Jagatsinghpur. Complainant alleged that due to negligent act of O.Ps., she lost her job. Therefore, complainant filed this complaint before the District Forum seeking direction to O.Ps. to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation towards loss and mental agony as well as to pay Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation cost.

(2.) Notices being served, O.Ps. appeared and filed their written version. They contested on the point of maintainability of the complaint in view of Section 6 of Indian Post Office Act, 1898 and Clause 81 and 84 of the Post Office Guide, P-1. It was contended that on the very day O.P. No. 1 delivered in total 187 number of letters including 33 speed post articles to CDMO, Jagatsinghpur vide local dak through Sri Jayanta Parida, Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier. The allegation of non-delivery of Speed Post was enquired into and CDMO, Jagatsinghpur was requested to return the same vide letters dated 6.12.2012; 18.12.2012 and 8.1.2013, but there was no response. It was pleaded that O.Ps. have performed their part of duty and are not liable. Further, it was stated that complainant has not come with clean hands as the Speed Post article was sent on the last date of submission of application before CDMO, Balasore. It was not possible that the postal article registered on 13.8.2012 could have reached Balasore on the same day for consideration of application of complainant by the concerned authority. It was further pleaded that Post Office receives the article in pursuance of the Act and Rules made thereunder. Neither a contract simpliciter, nor a contract of bailment is brought about between the Post Office and the sender nor the Post. Office and the addressee. The Post Office has no hire, no merchandise, nor commerce, nor does it act as a common carrier in carrying an article of thing transmissible by post. In view of the above submissions O.Ps. are not liable and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

(3.) Taking into consideration the principle of natural justice and the benevolent character of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, learned District Forum directed the O.Ps. to pay the complainant jointly and severally Rs. 50,000/- for loss of job, mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000/- for the cost of the litigation within 45 days from the date of pronouncement of the order i.e. 12.6.2013.