THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF POSTAL EMPLOYEES-GROUP-C(FNPO) WILL BE HELD AT GUNTUR,ANDHRA PRADESH CIRCLE,FROM 10.01.2013 TO 12.01.2013.THE CONFERENCE WILL BE INAUGURATED BY Dr.KRUPARANI KILLI,H'BLE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COMMUNICATIONS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
'Indian post not liable for mistake of foreign post'
PANAJI: The Indian postal service cannot be held liable for wrongful acts done by a foreign post office beyond the limits of India and the Indian postal service enjoys legal immunity from being prosecuted for wrong payments or delay in payments for money order by foreign post offices.
This is a recent judgment of the Goa state consumer disputes redressal commission which upheld the ruling of the South Goa consumer disputes redressal forum.
The case relates to a complaint filed by Suresh Raikar of Alto Dabolim. Around November 1, 2006, Raikar sent two money orders to his son who was then residing at Dharamshala, Butawal in Nepal. The first money order was for 850 and the second money order was for 2,000. The money orders were sent from Margao post office.
It is Raikar's contention that both the money orders were not delivered to his son in Nepal. In August 2008, he filed a complaint with the South Goa district consumer disputes redressal forum demanding compensation of Rs 8.5 lakh. The forum dismissed the complaint and Raikar then appealed to the state commission.
The Margao post masters' office submitted that the first money order was delivered to Raikar's son in Nepal on January 2, 2007, as informed by the section officer, general post office, Kathmandu, Nepal. The second money order was returned to Raikar on December 3, 2008. The state consumer disputes redressal commission observed that Raikar had not been candid enough to disclose this fact.
Raikar insisted that the first money order must have been delivered to a wrong person on January 2, 2007, because his son had left the address on December 23, 2006.
Counsel for the Margao post master claimed immunity from liability by virtue of Section 48 of the India Post Office Act, 1898. He submitted that the liability of the Indian postal service or for that matter of the central government ceased with the borders of the country and cannot be extended to the acts or omissions on the part of foreign post office.
The counsel also referred to paragraph 84 (2) of the Post Office Guide, which states that theIndian Post Office is exempted by law from all responsibility in the case of wrong payment or delay in payment by foreign postal administration of money orders issued in India.
This is a recent judgment of the Goa state consumer disputes redressal commission which upheld the ruling of the South Goa consumer disputes redressal forum.
The case relates to a complaint filed by Suresh Raikar of Alto Dabolim. Around November 1, 2006, Raikar sent two money orders to his son who was then residing at Dharamshala, Butawal in Nepal. The first money order was for 850 and the second money order was for 2,000. The money orders were sent from Margao post office.
It is Raikar's contention that both the money orders were not delivered to his son in Nepal. In August 2008, he filed a complaint with the South Goa district consumer disputes redressal forum demanding compensation of Rs 8.5 lakh. The forum dismissed the complaint and Raikar then appealed to the state commission.
The Margao post masters' office submitted that the first money order was delivered to Raikar's son in Nepal on January 2, 2007, as informed by the section officer, general post office, Kathmandu, Nepal. The second money order was returned to Raikar on December 3, 2008. The state consumer disputes redressal commission observed that Raikar had not been candid enough to disclose this fact.
Raikar insisted that the first money order must have been delivered to a wrong person on January 2, 2007, because his son had left the address on December 23, 2006.
Counsel for the Margao post master claimed immunity from liability by virtue of Section 48 of the India Post Office Act, 1898. He submitted that the liability of the Indian postal service or for that matter of the central government ceased with the borders of the country and cannot be extended to the acts or omissions on the part of foreign post office.
The counsel also referred to paragraph 84 (2) of the Post Office Guide, which states that theIndian Post Office is exempted by law from all responsibility in the case of wrong payment or delay in payment by foreign postal administration of money orders issued in India.
Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008
To view Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure OM No.10/2/2011-E-III (A) dated 3rd January,2013 regarding Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 - the re-exercised of option under Rule 6 of the Central Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 in case of employees covered under the OM dated 19.3.2012 please Click Here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)