The postal department takes 15 days to deliver a speed
post resulting in a woman missing out on her chance of being appointed
as a JBT teacher. However, the department stands protected against
claims of deficiency in services by virtue of a statute which says a
post office is not liable to compensate if damage caused was not wilful
or fraudulent.
The post office derives this
protection from section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 which says
no official of the post office shall incur any liability by reason of
any loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage, unless he has caused the same
fraudulently or by his wilful act or default.
In the
instant case, a woman from Gurgaon, was denied any relief by the Gurgaon
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum when she claimed a
compensation of Rs. 20 lakh from three post offices after her
applications for JBT teacher’s appointment failed to reach the Delhi
Subordinate Services Selection Board’s office in time.
The
woman had sent two applications for appointment of JBT teacher by way
of speed post registry on December 31, 2009 through post office,
Pataudi, Gurgaon with last date for submission as January 15, 2010.
The
Speed Post registry failed to reach it in time to DSSS Board at
Karkardooma here even as a speed post should have reached within 48
hours.
She moved the District Forum against Post
Office, Pataudi, District Gurgaon, the main post office in Gurgaon and
the post office at Karkardooma and also the DSSS Board seeking
compensation.
In their reply, the post offices at
Gurgaon told the Forum that the complainant’s post was dispatched to
Speed Post Centre, Delhi on December 31, 2009 for being delivered to its
destination. However, the centre in New Delhi inadvertently dispatched
both the articles to Krishna Nagar head office due to heavy work in
connection with mailing AIEEE admission forms. Her posts were received
at Krishna Nagar office on January 15, 2010 and were anyway taken to
DSSS Board but they refused to accept the same.
The
post offices on their part said it was the fault of the Board that it
refused to accept the applications and went on to claim protection under
section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act. The Board in turn said it
could not accept any application after the advertised date and time.
Accepting
the arguments, the District Forum held the post office not liable.
Consequently, no case of deficiency of service is made out, it said.