HARI SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Complainant had purchased 30 Indira Vikas Patras (hereafter referred to as IVPs) from Post Office, Nazibabad, Bijnore (UP) of Rs. 2500 denomination totalling Rs. 75,000 and the maturity value thereof was Rs. 1,50,000. The IVPs matured on 5.7.1998. The Petitioner sent a letter to Deputy Post Master, Post Office, Nazibabad, Distt. Bijnor, UP stating that he wanted payment of the IVPs from Post Office, Sultanpur. The Complainant, therefore, requested for verification of the IVPs. This letter was received by Deputy Post Master, Sultanpur Head Office on 7.7.1998. On 29.9.1998, the Petitioner lost IVPs while going from Charbag, Lucknow to his residence New Kanchanpuri Colony, Harijan Basti, Lucknow. FIR was lodged in respect of the same and the Opposite Party No. 4 was informed about it on 22.9.1998. The Police made arrest in connection with the loss of the said IVPs and recovered IVPs of the maturity value of Rs. 66,000. However, IVPs of which maturity value was Rs. 85,000 could not be recovered. The Complainant sought payment of the said IVPs, but the payment was not made. The Complainant alleging deficiency filed complaint before the District Forum seeking direction to pay maturity value of Rs. 85.000 with 18% interest thereon from 5.7.1998 till date of realisation. Besides this, the Complainant sought Rs. 10,000 for physical and mental harassment as also cost of litigation.

(2.) THE District Forum allowed the claim and directed the Opposite Party to pay maturity value of Rs. 85,000 and also to pay interest after the date of maturity as per Departmental Rules as well as cost of Rs. 2,000 as cost of litigation. This order was challenged by the Opposite Party before the State Commission.

(3.) THE State Commission after an elaborate discussion and analysis of the matter and taking into consideration Rules 7 to 11 of Indira Vikas Patra Rules, 1986 as also judgement of the Apex Court in Central Government of India and Others v. Krishnaji Parvetesh Kulkarni, III (2006) SLT 352=II (2006) CLT 118 (SC)=AIR 2006 SC 1744, allowed the appeal of the Opposite Party.