SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES vs Pradip Kumar Das

THE Postal Department is in appeal against the impugned order of the District Forum, Boudh in C.D. Case No. 17/95 directing the appellant to pay a compensation amount of Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 500/- for costs of litigation on allegation by the complainant of deficiency in service on their part.

THE complainant approached the District Forum with an allegation that though he had addressed a registered letter with A.D. to the Principal, I.G.N.O.U., New Delhi alongwith a Bank Draft of Rs. 750/- and certificates for procuring some application form to appear at certain examination, the Postal Department did not deliver the letter to the addressee, he could not make the application and thus was deprived to appear the examination. He sustained loss and claimed compensation for mental stress and agony. The defense of the Postal Department was that on enquiry it was found that since there was no post of Principal in the said University, the registered letter was returned with an endorsement noting ''No Principal in I.G.N.O.U. in Delhi-68'', therefore, they did not commit any deficiency in service.

The District Forum disbelieved the case of the complainant and held that the complainant failed to prove that in fact he had sent a draft for Rs. 750/-. Secondly also the District Forum did not accept the case of the complainant in the absence of any material that he was to appear at any particular examination of the University, with the further reason that the complainant did not furnish the particulars of the examination, the date of examination, the last date for receiving the application for examination.

IN our view the complainant failed to prove the main fact of the case so as to be entitled to get compensation. We do not think that the District Forum was correct in holding that there was deficiency of service on the part of the Postal Authorities for such non-delivery of the letter to the addressee. Normally a University does have a Registrar as its administrative functionary. A post of Principal in a University is unheard. Therefore, no material has been placed by the complainant before the District Forum that in fact there was an officer in the name of "Principal" to receive any letter. It could not be said that the Postal Authorities committed any error by not delivering the letter particularly to a person not in existence in the institution. Secondly, the possibility of the University people refusing to accept such a letter which was apparently addressed to a wrong person could not be ruled out. If that could have been a case, then also Postal Authorities did not commit any mistake. We, therefore, do not find any reason to sustain the judgment of the District Forum merely for the purpose of non-delivery of the letter because of the reason indicated above. The appeal is allowed but no costs. Dr. Arati Mohanty, Member-I agree. Mr. Pramodnath Das, Member-I agree. Appeal allowed.