BRUNDABAN MOHARANA Vs. BHARAT MOTORS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition arises in execution prceedings for executing the order dated 18.8.2001 of the District Forum which has attained finality. To find out the truth it was repeatedly heard and adjourned.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are as under: Shri K.M. Singh, the complainant is the petitioner before us. He had various monthly income accounts in two different Post Offices, Rajouri Garden and Ramesh Nagar, Head Office. There were 16 such accounts starting from 1993 to 1998. One of such account was closed on 18.12.2000 and five in 2001. A. letter dated 16.7.1999 was written by the Post Office to Sh. Singh pointing out that two of his accounts were irregular as total share of investment exceeded Rs. 2,04,000/-. The accounts had No. 84667 dated 3.1.98 and 82934 dated 8.9.95. Therefore, decision was taken to stop crediting interest in these accounts. Sh. Singh complained that he was never told of excess deposit or there was any limit of deposits. In any case he wanted the regularization of irregular accounts. For that he even approached the Post Office. Ultimately, complaining deficiency in service Shri Singh went to the District Forum.

(3.) It was the case of the Post Office that Monthly Income Scheme is governed by Post Office (Monthly Income Account) Rules, 1987 framed by the Central Government in exercise of its power conferred under Section 15 of the Government Saving Banks Act, 1873. Rule 4 of the said Rules provided that a depositor may open more than one account subject to the condition that deposits in all accounts taken together do not exceed Rs. 2,04,000/ - which was for a single account and Rs. 4,08,000/- in joint account and from 1.2.2000 this limit was further enhanced respectively to Rs. 3.00 lakhs and Rs. 6.00 lakhs. Under Rule 17 of the Rules, decision was, therefore, taken by the Head Post Office who was competent to take such decision to cause the accounts in excess to be closed and deposits made in these accounts to be refunded to the depositor without interest. Rule 10 no doubt empowers the Central Government to relax the Rules. The Postal Athorities took up the matter at higher levels of Government hierarchy for relaxation of the rules in favour of the complainant but this was not acceded to.