Harbhagwan Dass vs The Chief Post-Master General and Others

Rameshwar Singh Malik, J.—The, petitioner, by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226 /227 of the Constitution of India, seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to pay the interest amount of Rs. 80,000/- to the petitioner on his alleged fixed deposits. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the material fact that for the same relief, the petitioner approached District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad, vide complaint Annexure P-1, which came to be dismissed with costs of Rs. 5,000/- vide order dated 7.9.2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad, vide Annexure P-3.

Feeling aggrieved against the above-said order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad, petitioner preferred his first appeal No. 1284 of 2012 before the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Haryana. However, petitioner withdrew his appeal vide order dated 19.11.2012 (Annexure P-4). The orders passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad as well as the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana contained in Annexures P-3 and P-4 are not even under challenge in the present writ petition.

The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that some fraud was played with him. If it is so, then petitioner will have to lead evidence to establish factual foundation in this regard. Once the petitioner has availed his remedy under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by approaching the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and also by filing his appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the instant writ petition, in the peculiar fact situation of the case, is not maintainable. No other argument was raised. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case noted above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition is misconceived, bereft of any merit and without any substance, thus, it must fail. No case for interference has been made out.

Resultantly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.