Archaic postal rules make clients suffer

The parcel did not reach the destination. Finally,after repeated enquires,Gill was told that the parcel had been delivered at the wrong address in Canada. Aggrieved,he filed a case in the consumer forum.

In its reply,the Post Office stated that the web complaint regarding non-delivery of the parcel was lodged with the department’s Web Base Grievances Mechanism in October 2010. The department further claimed that in view of the rules of the Indian Post Office Act 1898,the Post Office was exempted from any responsibility for loss or mis-delivery of a consignment. The department demanded that the complaint must be dismissed.

President of the Forum Lakshman Sharma and Members Madhu Mutneja and Jaswinder Singh Sidhu maintained that the exemption given in the Indian Post Office Act 1898 cannot apply to modernised forms of transactions like speed-post,e-mail or money transfer.

The Forum also observed that at the time of booking,Gill had not disclosed the contents of the parcel to the department. It was not insured by the Post Office either. Hence,Gill was not entitled to the value of the contents of the articles.

In its order,the Forum directed the Post Office to refund Rs 6,370 to Gill as the speed post charges,pay him Rs 5,000 for the harassment caused to him,and Rs 7,000 as cost of litigation.

But in another case,where a city resident had sent a parcel through the ordinary delivery service of the Post Office,the department had to pay only Rs 120 as compensation. The complainant had claimed that he had sent a saree worth Rs 5,000 to a family member in Bhiwani.

In this case,the Post Office claimed that it was protected by the rules of the Indian Post Office Act 1898.

Hence,even after the complainant filed a case in the consumer forum,the Forum could not grant him any additional compensation for the loss and harassment caused to him.