State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sib Sankar Pal vs Sub-Post Master on 30 August, 2017
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. A/1337/2014 (Arisen out of Order Dated 17/09/2014 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/177/2012 of District Burdwan) 1. Sib Sankar Pal Kumarpara, Hirapur, Burnpur, Burdwan - 713 325. 2. Jhuma Pal Kumarpara, Hirapur, Burnpur, Burdwan - 713 325. 3. Urmila Pal Kumarpara, Hirapur, Burnpur, Burdwan - 713 325. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Sub-Post Master Burnpur Market Sub Post Office, Burnpur, Burdwn - 713 325. 2. Soumen Routh, Postal Agent Nabaghanti, P.S. - Hirapur, Burnpur - 713 325. 3. Sr. Supdt of Post Offices Asansol Division, Asansol - 713 301. 4. Chief Post Master General West Bengal Postal Circle, Jogajog Bhaban, Kolkata - 700 012. 5. General Manager, Postal Accounts & Finance 20B, Abdul Hamid Street, Kolkata - 700 069. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER For the Appellant: Mr. R. S. Ganguly , Advocate For the Respondent: Mrs. Ratna Brahmachari, Advocate Dated : 30 Aug 2017 Final Order / Judgement Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member
Challenge in this batch of 5 Appeals, viz., A/1334/2014, A/1335/2014, A/1336/2014, A/1337/2014, and A/1338/2014, by the Appellants is the various orders passed by the Ld. District Forum, Burdwan on 17-09-2014 in respect of their respective complaint cases. By such orders, the Ld. District Forum dismissed all the complaints. Since, except for the value of investments and dates of such investments, giving rise to the claims, the question of law and the grounds on which the claims had not been considered by the Respondents in all cases are similar, all these Appeals are being disposed of by this common order. In this regard, Appeal No. A/1334/2014 is treated as the lead case and the facts of that case are taken as illustrative. It is also clarified here that the outcome of other Appeals would be governed by the fate of this Appeal.
Case of the Complainants, in short, is that they opened two MIS accounts at OP No. 1 Post Office by depositing Rs. 4,50,000/- in each accounts totaling Rs. 9,00,000/- on 02-02-2011 at the counter of the said Post Office. After receiving said money, the Post Office concerned issued two pass books from its counter under seal and signature of the OP No. 1. Although the Complainant did not face any difficulty in getting monthly interest against such deposits, suddenly the said Post Office stopped paying any interest to them. On enquiry, they learnt that both the passbooks and entries made therein towards payment of monthly interests, were false. As the Postal Authority refused to own up any responsibility in this regard, finding no other alternative, they filed the instant case before the Ld. District Forum.
In this regard, it is submitted by the OP Postal Authorities that OP No. 2 was an SAS agent being appointed by the State Officials and he had no right to deposit more than Rs. 10,000/-in cash. These OPs denied that the OP No. 1 received any cash from the Complainants. It is further submitted that since similar complaints have been made by some other people as well, necessary FIR was lodged with the local Police Station, who has booked the OP No. 2 and the said Police Authority is still investing the matter. Accordingly, the Postal Authority prayed for dismissal of the case.
Decision with reasons It is the case of the Appellants that they tendered due amount in respect of their investment at the counter of the Respondent No. 1 Post Office and the said Post Office issued pass books under its seal and signature. Also, it is claimed by the Appellants that every time they received monthly interest from the said Post Office, the latter made due endorsement to that effect in the pass books concerned and authenticated the same by putting their office seal and signature.
On the other hand, it is alleged by the Respondents that the pass books were fake documents and they did not receive any money from the Appellants. The Respondents, therefore, averred that while the Post Office did not receive any deposit from the Appellants, there was no question of paying any interests over such alleged deposits to them or refund the principal amount of alleged deposits.
It appears from the impugned order that the Appellants submitted the original passbooks before it together with photocopies thereof in support of their contention. The Ld. District Forum, however, did not deem it fit and proper to ascertain genuineness of the same out of its notion that it was beyond the terms of reference of the Ld. District Forum.
Be that as it may, from the photocopies of pass books on record, there can be no manner of doubt that the same virtually resembles original MIS passbooks usually issued by the Postal Department to MIS holders. There was no disparity in respect of the official seal either being put on the said pass books vis-à-vis original postal seal. Besides, it is hardly believable that a lady of 65 years (Appellant No. 1) would show the audacity of placing a manufactured document before a Court of Law in collusion with the Respondent No. 2 without fearing the consequences of such falsity. In any case, if the Respondents were so confident that those passbooks were indeed fabricated documents, one wonders, what prevented them from prosecuting the Appellants for daring to forge official seal and document of Govt. of India.
It is also important to keep in mind that a criminal case has been instituted not only against the Respondent No. 2, but also against some officials of the Respondent No. 1. In this regard, we are inclined to quote relevant portion of the FIR dated 17-01-2013 lodged by Asst. Supdt. of Posts, Asansol 1st Sub-Division with the Officer-in-Charge, Hirapur Police Station, Post Burnpur MDG, Dist. Burdwan for better understanding of the matter.
"Sub: Lodging of FIR Against Tapan Kr. Mallick the then post master BNP MKT & Sri Kartick Mondal s/o late Girish Mondal the then Postal Assistant BNP MKT Post office To Officer in charge Hirapur police station Post Burnpur MDG Dist. Burdwan 713325 Sir, This is to inform you that recently financial scandal at Burnpur MKT post office has come to light, and respective depositors of Burnpur MKT post office started to gather to verify their accounts like MIS, Savings bank account & Recurring accounts and submitted their Xerox copy of pass book available with them.
In this connection undersigned started investigation with other members of squad on the basis of Xerox copy of Applications submitted by depositors and it has been proved that Sri Tapan Kr. Mallick the then sub postmaster BNP MKT post office at Kulti Shibmandir road post kulti has issued many fake MIS pass books in connivances with SAS agent namely sri Soumen Routh. On investigation it is noticed that one parallel account numbers were used on fake pass book against original Account. Thus many fake pass books have issued by using same and parallel number, and counter PA Sri Kartik Mondal S/o Girish Mondal at Master Para Hutton Rd post Assansol - 01 paid interest from such fake MIS pass book of same parallel numbers without consulting the genuineness of amount, name of the depositors, etc. with relevant office records....." (sic) Such candid admission on the part of the Asst. Supdt. of Posts, Asansol 1st Sub-Division leaves nothing to imagination about the involvement of employees of the Postal Department in the matter. Therefore, it is needless to say that the Respondent Postal Authorities must own up vicarious liability for the tort of their own employees.
We have also taken due note of the fact that the Appellants of this Appeal are not the only sufferers. In fact, the Appellants of other Appeals, as mentioned above, have come up with similar allegation. It further appears from the copy of order of this Commission dated 08-06-2016 in A/1465/2014 that similar Appeal was moved by one Smt. Jayanti Bhowmick and Sri Amit Bhowmick against the Respondent Postal authorities alleging similar irregularity.
Keeping all these facts in mind, we have no hesitation accepting the allegation of the Appellants as gospel truth.
We are fully in agreement with the Ld. District Forum that adjudication of disputes over misappropriation/defalcation of money is beyond the jurisdiction of Consumer Fora. However, in our considered opinion, the Ld. District Forum somehow overlooked the larger issue involved in this case. Fact of the matter remains that the Appellants deposited their hard-earned money at the counter of the Respondent No. 1 Post Office. Therefore, it was obligatory on the part of the officials of the Respondent No. 1 Post Office to duly account for the deposited money at the official record of the Post Office concerned and issue original pass books in favour of the Appellants. That it was not done, thanks to arbitrary act on the part of some officials of the Postal Department clearly points out gross deficiency in service on the part of said officials. As stated above, for such gross deficiency in service on the part of its own officials, the Respondent Postal Authority cannot shrug off their vicarious liability to make good the loss suffered by the depositors.
The Ld. District Forum notwithstanding cited pendency of criminal and departmental proceedings against the accused persons behind its inability to fix the responsibility of the Respondent Postal Department, we feel, the Ld. District Forum should have appreciated that pendency of criminal case is no bar to adjudicate a complaint case. Further, the aforementioned FIR lodged with Hirapur Police Station, Burdwan clerly makes out a prima facie case against the employees of the Respondent No. 1 Post Office. That apart, although the Respondent Postal Authority has sought to avoid any liability in the matter citing pendency of departmental proceedings against the accused persons, the aforesaid FIR makes it quite clear that the Respondent Postal Authority after conducting due investigation itself was satisfied about the bona fide of allegations of the aggrieved depositors. Further, departmental proceedings is an internal matter of the Postal Department and as such, this cannot in anyway stand in the way of adjudicating a consumer complaint.
In view of the foregoing discussion, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order.
Resultantly, the Appeal stands allowed.
Hence, O R D E R E D that the Appeal be and the same is allowed on contest against the Respondents. Appellant Postal Authority is directed to refund, within 45 days hence, the principal amount of investments being made by the Appellants together with simple interest @ 9% p.a. over the principal sum from the date of filing of the complaint case before the Ld. District Forum till full and final payment is made. Besides this, Respondent Postal Authority shall also pay litigation cost to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- to the Appellants.
Consequent thereof, all other Appeals too stand allowed in the same manner.
Let the original copy of this Order be kept in the case record of A/1334/2014 and photocopies thereof on other files. [HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA] MEMBER