RESERVED
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
U.P., Lucknow.
Appeal No.2115 of 1997
Sr. Post Master, H.O. Jaunpur through
The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Jaunpur. ….Appellant.
Versus
Smt. Saroj Srivastava
W/o Late Sri Radhey Mohan Srivastava,
C/o Shri R.K. Srivastava, Rail Path Nirikshak,
Northern Railway, Jaunpur. (Since dead)
1- Sri Rakesh Kumar S/o Late Sri Radhey Mohan
2- Sri Sarvesh Kumar S/o Late Sri Radhey Mohan
3- Sri Janesh Kumar S/o Late Sri Radhey Mohan
4- Sri Vivek Kumar S/o Late Sri Radhey Mohan
…Respondents.
Present:-
1- Hon’ble Sri A.K. Bose, Presiding Member.
2- Hon’ble Sri Sanjai Kumar, Member.
Dr. U.V. Singh for the appellant.
Sri R.K. Mishra, Advocate for the respondent.
Date 5.5.2016
JUDGMENT
Sri A.K. Bose, Member- Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4.9.1997, passed by the Ld. DCDRF, Jaunpur in complaint case No.239 of 1993, the appellant Sr. Post Master, H.O. Jaunpur through the Superintendent of Post Offices, Jaunpur preferred the instant appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act 68 of 1986) on the ground that the impugned order is arbitrary, perverse and is bad in the eye of law. It was delivered without proper appreciation of law and/or application of mind on the basis of surmises and conjunctures and therefore, it has been prayed that the same be set aside in
(2)
the interest of justice otherwise, the appellant will suffer irreparable loss.
From perusal of the records, it transpires that during the pendency of the appeal the respondent/complainant Smt. Saroj Srivastava left of heavenly abode therefore, her legal heirs Sri Rakesh Kumar, Sri Sarvesh Kumar, Sri Janesh Kumar and Sri Vivek Kumar were duly substituted in her place. The newly substituted respondents appeared through their Ld. Counsel Sri R.K. Mishra.
The records show that late Shri Radhey Mohan Srivastava husband of the original respondent/complainant Smt. Saroj Srivastava (since dead and duly substituted by her sons) had 3 NSCs (National Savings Certificate) VI Issue for Rs.1,000.00 each bearing nos.666114 to 666116 which were purchased from Kutchery Post Office, Jaunpur on 14.10.1986. Shri Radhey Mohand Srivastava expired on 26.1.1987. Consequently, an intimation of the death was given to the Post Office and a request was made to substitute the name of his legal representatives. Accordingly, 3 fresh NSC bearing nos.34 E-572780 to 572782 were issued in the joint name of Smt. Saroj Srivastava and Shri A.K. Srivastava. The date of maturity of the NSCs was 14.10.1992. It has been alleged that the appellant Post Office failed to encash the above NSCs on maturity without any cogent reason. Feeling aggrieved by this gross remiss and non-feasance/ misfeasance in public office, complaint case no.239 of 1993 was preferred before the Ld. DCDRF, Jaunpur.
From perusal of the records and the judgment passed
(3)
by the Forum below, it is clear that the genuineness of the aforesaid instruments has not been denied by the appellant Post Office. Its case is that the records of the Post Office have been misplaced and therefore, payment could not be made to the holder for want of records. A departmental enquiry was instituted to fix the responsibility on the defaulting official. However, neither the details of he enquiry has been divulged nor the result of the same has been disclosed.
The Forum below, on the basis of facts, circumstances and evidence on record, directed the appellant Post Office on 4.9.1997 to encash the NSCs with interest and all other consequential benefits. It also directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.400.00 as cost of litigation. Aggrieved by this judgment and order, the instant appeal has been preferred.
Heard the ld. Counsel for parties and perused the records. It is admitted fact that Shri Radhey Mohan Srivastava was the original holder of the NSCs and on his death, his legal heirs Smt. Saroj Srivastava and Sri A.K. Srivastava were substituted in his place and fresh NSCs were issued in their names. It has been contended that payment could not be made to the holder of the NSCs when produced for payment on maturity as in the meantime official records of the Post Office concerned got misplaced and were not traceable. We have given due consideration on this aspect of the matter. If the records of the Post Office is not available or has reportedly been misplaced then it is their problem for which the general
(4)
public or the respondent/complainant cannot be held responsible. The remiss is unpardonable and amounts to serious misfeasance in public office. It has been submitted in the written arguments that the payment could not be made due to non-availability of the records relating to purchase/transfer application. During the course of arguments, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant, however, admitted that the Department is willing to pay the maturity value of the NSCs with interest and all other consequential benefits as directed by the Forum below. Upon this, the Ld. Counsel for the respondents submitted that they have approached the Post Office a number of times for this purpose and every time, a plea was taken that payment would be made only after disposal of the appeal. This factum has been denied by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant as bogus and baseless. An endorsement to this effect was made in the order sheet dated 14.3.2016. The respondents/complainants are running from pillar to post for the last more than quarter century for the payment of the maturity value of the NSCs yet, the payment has been withheld without any cogent ground. The Forum below considered all facts, circumstances and evidence on record before delivering the impugned judgment. There is no irregularity and illegality in the same and therefore, in view of the discussions made hereinabove, we are not inclined to interfere in it. Consequently, the appeal, being meritless, deserves to be dismissed.
(5)
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. Certified copy of the judgment be provided to the parties in accordance with rules.
(A.K. Bose) (Sanjai Kumar)
Presiding Member Member
Jafri PA II
Court No.3
