KALIDAS MANOHARDAS PATEL vs SUB POST MASTER, RANIP

THIS appeal arises from order dated 4th January, 2001 rendered by the learned Ahmedabad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in Complaint No. 28/2000 directing the opponent Postal Department to pay to the complainant compensation as well as cost in the sum of Rs. 100/- on account of the fact that the opponent Postal Department displayed deficiency in service with regard to the registered cover containing demand draft for donation of Rs. 500/- to be sent to the Army Central Welfare Fund.

THE grievance of the complainant before this Commission by way of this appeal is that the facts with regard to deficiency in service on the part of the opponent Postal Department had not been properly appreciated by the learned Forum, hence he would have been entitled to compensation and cost as prayed for, namely Rs. 1,500/- and Rs. 5,000/- respectively. THE learned Advocate appearing for the opponent Postal Department would submit that the complainant has not suffered any loss as the first draft for donation sent by the complainant by registered A.D. post neither reached the donee nor stood returned to the complainant, where as the duplicate demand draft taken by the complainant was given back to him by the opponent Postal Department. In our considered opinion this is not only gross negligence, but the facts speaking for themselves clearly spell out wilful default on the part of the concerned employee/s of the Postal Department. THEy were not alive to the benevolent cause which the complainant was following. This is not a case where the complainant was bothered with regard to the amount of the demand draft. This is a case where the complainant was out to serve the cause of the Nation and the opponent''s concerned staff/employee defeated the very purpose of such a noble cause in the aforesaid manner. In our considered opinion the learned Forum has clearly committed an error in not awarding at least appropriate amount of cost to the complainant. We are mindful about the provision of Section 6 of the Post Office Act. Considering the said provision and relying upon a decision of the Hon''ble National Commission in the case of Post Master, Ranipett, H.O. and Anr.v. Shri M.B. Janakiraman, we propose to issue following directions, bearing in mind the aforesaid facts of the case : (1) Over and above the compensation in the sum of Rs. 100/- awarded by the learned Forum we further award cost in the sum of Rs. 1,500/- in favour of the complainant against the opponent Postal Department. (2) We direct the opponent Postal Department to pay/deposit Rs. 500/- in the Army Central Welfare Fund in the name of the complainant and obtain receipt in the name of the complainant and deliver the same to the complainant. (3) It will be open to the opponent Postal Department to take appropriate disciplinary action against the erring postal employee(s)/staff of the opponent Postal Department. All the aforesaid directions shall be complied with, within 2 months from today. This appeal is accordingly allowed. Appeal allowed.