NATIONAL SAVINGS Vs. ANNAPURNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -AGGRIEVED by the order in C. D. No. 289/2005 on the file of District Forum, Guntur, opposite parties preferred this appeal.

(2.) THE brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant was National Savings Scheme Agent at Vinukonda, Guntur District and submitted that she was appointed as such by the opposite parties to collect deposits from the public on behalf of the National Savings Organization and these deposits were to be deposited in the Post Office and the opposite parties agreed to allow percentage/commission on the National Savings booked by her as remuneration for her services. The claims have to be processed by the District Savings Officer, N. S. S. , Guntur attached to the Deputy Regional Director, Vijayawada and the bills were sent to second opposite party i. e. , Deputy Regional Director, Machilipatnam and the final approval for this claim is subject to the approval of Regional Director, Bangalore. The complainant further submitted that the entire scheme works subject to the rules and regulations issued by Ministry of Finance, Government of India, from time-to-time and in case of non-payment of commission, the District Collector can also intervene. The complainant submitted that her agency was renewed up to 12. 12. 2002 and she had received commission up to April 1999 but did not receive any commission from the Organization of N. S. S. on the deposits booked by her amounting to Rs. 1,32,225 and the remuneration payable to her comes to Rs. 6,331 and this amount was due and payable to her and was not paid in spite of confirmation of commission due to the complainant by letter No. 276-79/mpkby/drd/mtm/2002 dated 27. 6. 2002. Hence the complaint for a direction to the opposite parties for release of remuneration due for the period from 1999 to September 1999 for Rs. 6,331 together with interest at 18% p. a. , from September 1999 till the date of realization, compensation of Rs. 50,000 and costs.

(3.) OPPOSITE party No. 3 filed version on behalf of other opposite parties denying that they hired the services of the complainant for commission. They submitted that the remuneration or commission is only result of an agreement between the parties and hence the complainant is only an agent of the Organization and hence the matter is outside the purview of Consumer Protection Act. They relied on a decision in Case No. 2/2000 of the District Forum, Chatra, Bihar and submitted that the National Commission also confirmed that these transactions are in the nature of Agency Agreement arising out of the Principal and Agency relations and hence outside the scope of Consumer Protection Act. They admitted the transactions of the complainant and submitted that as per the order of Ministry of Finance during the year 2003 itself such payments have to be paid by postal authorities and hence the opposite parties cannot entertain the claim and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.