AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.A. Puj, J.—Rule. Mr. P.S. Champaneri, learned Assistant Solicitor General waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and Mr. Sunil C. Patel, learned Standing Counsel waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent No. 3.
Looking to the issue involved in the present matter, this petition is taken up for final hearing.
The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction to the respondents to pay Rs. 1,20,000/- for 12 Kisan Vikas Patra each of Rs. 5,000/-. The petitioner has also prayed for direction to the respondent No. 2 to pay special cost and/or compound or penal interest on the principal amount of Rs. 60,000/- from the respondents, as due to the negligence and inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioner - society has incurred financial loss.
This Court has issued notice on 3rd May, 2010 and on service of notice, Mr. Sunil C. Patel, learned Standing Counsel appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 3 and placed on record the affidavit-in-reply of the respondent No. 3.
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is Agricultural Produce Market Committee registered under the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1958. The Secretary of Agricultural Produce Market Committee purchased Kisan Vikas Patra worth Rs. 60,000/- i.e. 12 in numbers X Rs. 5,000/- each of 7 1/4 years. As the stipulated time of Vikas Patra was over the petitioner submitted to Sub Post Master, Valia to encash the said Vikas Patra with interest. Hence, as per the rules, the petitioner was entitled to get Rs. 1,20,000/- i.e. double, the amount of original investment of Rs. 60,000/-. It was treated as Fixed deposit for 7 1/4 years by the petitioner with the post office. On 1st September, 2008, with the date of maturity of the Vikas Patra, when the petitioner submitted before the Sub Post Master at Valia, the petitioner was offered only Rs. 60,000/- and interest for an amount of Rs. 60,000/- was not offered to the petitioner on the ground that as per the Post Office Rules, 1997, the Society, Trust, Association, Semi Government and Government would purchasing such type of Vikas Patra are not entitled to get interest and on expiry of the period, they are entitled to get only the principal amount.
The grievance of the petitioner is that at the time of purchasing the Vikas Patra, the petitioner was not informed that the interest was not to be paid to the petitioner. Since the action of the respondent is absolutely unjust and improper, the petitioner has filed the present petition before this Court.
Ms. Tanuja Kachchhi, learned advocate for Mr. P.N. Bavishi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in case of Mahila Sewa Sahakari Bank Limited v. Chief Post Master, Ahmedabad and Ors. reported in 2007 48 GLR 945 and hence, the petition is required to be allowed and the respondent is directed to pay the amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- with further interest to the petitioner.
Mr. Sunil C. Patel, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 has, however, submitted that prior to 1st January, 1999, the maturity period of the certificates in question was five and half years, which came to be revised to seven years and three months vide Ministry of Finance Notification dated 31st March, 2001 and as amended from time to time. This being a policy matter of the Department, the petitioner has no scope to challenge the same. As soon as the rates are revised, the rubber stamps impression was placed on front and back side of the certificates. He has further submitted that the certificates are issued u/s 12 of The Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959. He has further submitted that as contemplated under Rule 13 of the Savings Certificates Rules 1960 any certificate purchased or acquired in excess of the limits prescribed under these Rules or in the old Rules or in contravention of these Rules, shall be encashed by the holder as soon as the fact is discovered and no interest should be paid on either the excess holding or any holding in contravention of these Rules. He has further submitted that as soon as it is noticed by the Sub Post Master, Valia that the said certificates are issued in contravention of Rule 6 of the Kisan Vikas Patra Rules, 1988, the petitioner was advised that only investment amount would be payable as the certificates were issued in contravention of Rule 6 of the Kisan Vikas Patra Rules, 1988. When the rules are not permitting for payment of the maturity interest to the investment amount, the respondent - authority cannot go beyond the Rules prescribed under the said Act. He has further submitted that at the time of issuance of the certificates, the petitioner had given the consent on 1st June, 2001 stating that he agreed to be abide by the conditions of the said Rules. He has further submitted that the certificates are issued u/s 12 of the Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959 which are covered under the statutory Rule 6 of the Kisan Vikas Patra Rules, 1988 and, therefore, taking into account the consent dated 1st June, 2001 given by the petitioner, the petitioner is bound to abide by the said conditions. He has, therefore, submitted that the reliefs as prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and having considered the rival submissions, the Court is of the view that the contentions which are raised by the respondent in the affidavit-in-reply were dealt with by this Court in its earlier decision in case of Mahila Sewa Sahakari Bank Limited v. Chief Post Master, Ahmedabad and Ors. (Supra) wherein this Court has observed that it is no doubt true that there are specific Rules framed for purchasing Kisan Vikas Patra under which the appellant - society as such would not be entitled to purchase Kisan Vikas Patra. In spite of this, the fact is that the respondent - authority without informing or bringing it to the notice of the appellant - society accepted the said amount way back in 1997 and it is only when in 2002 after a lapse of period of more that 5 and 1/2 years when the appellant-society had applied for renewal of it, then only the appellant-society was told that neither the said amount can be renewed nor it can get the amount with interest on it on its maturity date. If the appellant-petitioner was told in 1997, then it being a society, it would have definitely invested the said amount in any other national saving scheme. Having accepting the said amount from the appellant-petitioner without bringing it to its notice that it was not entitled to purchase Kisan Vikas Patra, it would not lie in the mouth of the respondent - authority to say that the society was not entitled to interest on Kisan Vikas Patra. While taking this view, the Court has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in case of Devang Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. Sub Post Master reported in 2006 (1) GLH (UJ) 1.
Considering the binding judgment of the Division Bench of this Court as well as above referred judgment, the Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get the interest on the Kisan Vikas Patra purchased by it and accordingly, the respondent - authority is hereby directed to pay principal as well as the the interest amount to the petitioner. The respondent - authority is further directed to pay further interest of Kisan Vikas Patra purchased by the petitioner - society, with interest at the current Bank rate from the day it became payable till the date of realisation. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.