U P JAL NIGAM, CONSTRUCTION DIVISION OF BAREILLY CONSTRUCTION DIVISION Vs. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE, DEPARTMENT OF POST & 3 ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three Appeals under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") have been filed by the U.P. Jal Nigam, Construction Division of Bareilly (for short "the Jal Nigam"), questioning the correctness and legality of a common order dated 29.10.2013, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P., Lucknow (for short "the State Commission") in Complaint Nos.34/2006, 43/2007 and 23/2009. By the impugned order, the State Commission has dismissed the Complaints filed by the Jal Nigam, seeking a direction to the Post Master General, Kanpur and its functionaries, the Respondents herein, to pay to it the maturity value of the Kissan Vikas Patras (for short "the KVPs), which included the interest element on the face value of each of the KVPs.

(2.) Since the issue involved in all the three Appeals is identical, except the face value of the KVPs, these are being disposed of by this common order.

(3.) The short controversy in the Complaints filed by the Jal Nigam before the State Commission was whether or not the Respondents were justified in refusing to pay interest on the subject KVPs, to the Jal Nigam, a Public Authority, because the KVPs were purchased by the two individuals, namely, U.S. Mittal and G.S. Dangwal, in their capacity as the Executive Engineers of the Jal Nigam and in one case, the KVPs had been purchased in the name of its Project Manager. According to the Respondents, in view of the Notification, issued by the Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, bearing No.G.S.R. 119 (E) dated 8.3.1995, which came into force w.e.f. 1.4.1995, since the KVPs, could not be purchased by any Corporation or Organization, it was not liable to pay interest to the Jal Nigam, notwithstanding the fact that the individuals/officials in whose names KVPs were purchased, had pledged these KVPs in its favour. On the contrary, the stand of the Jal Nigam was that when the said KVPs were obtained on maturity of the old KVPs, the respondents had not informed them that these could not be issued in its favour.