Dept of Post responsibe for actions of its postal agents

Mandakni,who was a resident of Sangrur before marriage,initially filed a complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,Sangrur. She stated that Akhil Gupta,a postal agent,persuaded her and her mother to deposit money in the department. The duo deposited the money,and on maturity in 2003,it was re-deposited in their account opened in Sub Post Office Sangrur.

Mandakni said they were issued a pass book which stated their deposit to be Rs 48,000. Later,she deposited an additional sum of Rs 43,000,for which another passbook was issued by the post office. The complainant said that when her marriage was fixed,she decided to withdraw the amount. To her shock,she found only Rs 8,000 in one account,and Rs 3,000 in other account.

Later,they came to know that a fraud of Rs 50 lakh had been committed by the Sub Post Master and Akhil Gupta. Mandakni filed a case in the Forum,stating that she had deposited a total of Rs 91,000 with the department and was entitled to the amount along with interest at the agreed rate.

The Department of Post stated that Akhil Gupta had been appointed by the state government,and the department was not responsible for his conduct. The department admitted that a criminal case had been registered regarding this misappropriation,but the offence had been committed by the postal agent of the state government.

The Forum gave its order in the complainant’s favour in February 2007. The Department appealed against the order in the Punjab Consumer Commission. After considering the case,the Commission observed that the accounts were opened with the Post Office,controlled by the Union of India. The contention of the department that Akhil Gupta was an agent of the state government was not proved by any document. The Commission observed that the letter regarding Gupta’s appointment was issued by the National Savings Organisation of the Union Ministry of Finance. The Commission said that ultimately,the agents worked for the central government in respect of the small saving scheme floated by it.

In this light,the Commission held that the order given by the Forum was perfectly valid,and directed the Department of Post to comply with it. The Commission enhaned the litigation costs for the complainant to Rs 10,000,and the appeal filed by the department was dismissed by the Commission.