K. R. VYAS, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner, who is a retired primary teacher, has moved this Court by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the the legality, validity and propriety of the action on the part of the Post Master General, Gujarat Circle, Ahmedabad whereby the repeated requests of the petitioner to effect the payment in respect of the Indira Vikas Patras (hereinafter referred to as the IVP certificates for short) purchased by the petitioner which were stolen from the custody of the petitioner was not accepted to even after the expiry of the maturity period of the same despite the fact that the petitioner was ready, willing and prepared to accept any reasonable terms and conditions which may be imposed by the respondents for the purpose of safeguarding the interest of the post office. ( 2 ) THE petitioner retired as a primary teacher on or about 30th May 1990 and on his retirement, he thought of investing the amount which he received as retirement benefit in IVPs issued by the Government of India. The petitioner purchased the IVP Certificates for a sum of Rs. 64,500. 00 from the Post Office situated at Ode Bazar, Umreth, the details of which are given hereunder:"in all, 25 Indira Vikas Patras, each for a sum of Rs. 2,500. 00 amounting in all to Rs. 62,500. 00, bearing Registration No. 762 and distinctive Nos. 708371 to 708395 issued on 3rd August 1990 having the maturity date of 3rd August 1995 for maturity value of Rs. 1,25,000. 00. In all, 4 Indira Vikas Patras, each for a sum of Rs. 500. 00 amounting in all to Rs. 2,000. 00, bearing Registration No. 1547 and distinctive Nos. 793512 to 793515, issued on 3rd November 1990 having the maturity date of 3rd August 1995 for maturity value of Rs. 4,000. 00. "the petitioner noticed that the said IVP Certificates were missing and therefore, he immediately lodged a complaint before the Police Station at Umreth on 18th December 1991 which was registered as Crime Register No. 43 of 1991. Thereafter on 21st December 1991, the petitioner informed the Post Master of Ode Bazar Post Office in writing mentioning the details of the IVP Certificates, viz. registration number, distinctive number, face value, date of issue, date of maturity and the maturity value. Thereafter on 21st December 1991, the petitioner informed the Post Master of Ode Bazar Post Office in writing mentioning the details of the IVP Certificates, viz. registration number, distinctive number, face value, date of issue, date of maturity and the maturity value. On 25th/26th December 1991, the petitioner submitted an application to the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division, Anand for issuance of duplicate IVP Certificates and to inform all concerned post offices not to accept the aforesaid IVP Certificates for encashment if presented by any one. In reply to the said application, the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division, by his communication dated 29th January 1992 informed the petitioner that all Post Offices have been informed about the IVPs, but there is no system of issuing duplicate IVPs. On 18. 5. 1995, the petitioner again informed the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division and requested him to issue requisite instructions to all concerned post offices for not accepting the aforesaid IVPs if any one comes for encashment of the same as the maturity dates of the IVPs were fast approaching. On 15. 6. 1995, after getting the details of the IVPs, the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division, issued instructions to all concerned not to accept the aforesaid IVPs for encashment. The petitioner, through his letter dated 11. 11. 1995 addressed to the Post Master, Main Post Office, Umreth, requested that since even after the maturity date has expired long back, and as nobody has presented the IVPs for encashment, the payment thereof may be effected to him. Similar request was also made on 11. 11. 1995 to the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division mentioning that he is prepared to abide by any reasonable terms and conditions which may be imposed for effecting the payment in favour of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid IVPs and also showed his willingness to give indemnity/security for effecting the payment to the petitioner. Again on 2nd March 1996, the petitioner addressed a letter to the respondent no. 1 wherein he mentioned that he is a retired primary teacher and he has no other means to maintain himself and his family, the amount of IVPs is urgently required. Again on 2nd March 1996, the petitioner addressed a letter to the respondent no. 1 wherein he mentioned that he is a retired primary teacher and he has no other means to maintain himself and his family, the amount of IVPs is urgently required. In response to the said letter, the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division by letter dated 4th June 1996 informed the petitioner that as per the Postal Department Rules, all concerned have been informed to prevent fraudulent encashment of the aforesaid IVPs and not to accept the same for encashment and it was not possible to do anything beyond what has been done and it would not be possible to accede to the request of the petitioner effecting payment. It may be stated that in the meantime, i. e. on 17. 5. 1996, the petitioner through his Advocate, got issued a notice to various authorities to do the needful in the matter failing which, the petitioner would be constrained to institute necessary legal action against the concerned. In response to the aforesaid notice, the Chief Post Master General, New Delhi by his communication dated 23rd May 1996 issued to the respondent no. 1 informed the respondent no. 1 to do the needful in the matter at the earliest. However, despite this, no action in the positive direction has been taken and as a result thereof, the petitioner has not received any payment in respect of the aforesaid IVPs and therefore, he has filed the present petition for a direction to the respondents to effect the payment in favour of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid IVPs together with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date when it became due. ( 3 ) THIS Court on 18. 6. 1997 issued Rule in the matter. By way of interim order, the respondents were restrained from making payment with respect to 29 IVPs described in paragraph 2 of the petition to anybody without the permission of this Court. The respondents were further directed to communicate that order to the concerned post offices in India. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel Mr. D. C. Dave appearing for the petitioner invited my attention to the relevant provisions of law and correspondence produced in the petition. The respondents were further directed to communicate that order to the concerned post offices in India. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel Mr. D. C. Dave appearing for the petitioner invited my attention to the relevant provisions of law and correspondence produced in the petition. He submitted that there is nothing in the Scheme/rules which prohibits the Department from encashing the concerned IVPs when sufficient proof is adduced with regard to its original purchase by the petitioner with full details about it and the subsequent misplacement of the same. In the submission of the learned Counsel, the details given by the petitioner are not in dispute. It was submitted that before the maturity date, when the complaint was filed, the respondents reacted immediately by informing all post offices that on maturity of the IVPs in the year 1995, the IVPs should not be permitted to be encashed by any person. Even thereafter by interim order passed by this Court to the effect that the IVPs were not to be encashed without the permission of the Court. Thus, no one has encashed the IVPs at that time nor have been given credit to and even today, no one has claimed having encashed the IVPs. Learned Counsel therefore, submitted that since no one has claimed or moved for encashment of the IVPs for more than ten years, i. e. from the date of issuance of the IVP Certificates and six years from the maturity date, the petitioner is entitled to get the amount. Finally learned Counsel submitted that the petitioner would give such undertaking to return the amount in case the claim is made by any one in future. ( 5 ) LEARNED Additional Central Govt. Standing Counsel Ms. Davawala, after inviting my attention to the reply filed in the matter, submitted that no encashment is permissible unless the original IVP Certificates are produced. Elaborating the said submission it was pointed out that the instrument is issued to any person whosoever demand and his name or address is not registered or a record is kept any where in any post office about the identification of the holder irrespective of the fact whether the holder is genuine or not for Department, he is the actual claimant. Learned Additional Standing Counsel justified the stand of the Department by contending that there is no provision to allow issuance of duplicate or encashment on indemnification. Learned Additional Standing Counsel justified the stand of the Department by contending that there is no provision to allow issuance of duplicate or encashment on indemnification. In the affidavit-in-reply filed to the petition by the Superintendent of Post Office, Anand Division, Anand, over and above the contentions raised by the Additional Standing Counsel, it is also contended that as many disputed questions and facts are involved in this petition, the petitioner may be relegated to the Civil Court as the petitioner has no right to file this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ( 6 ) FOR the purpose of deciding the question involved in the matter, it is necessary to refer to certain provisions of law. The Central Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 12 of the Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959 has framed Indira Vikas Patra Rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules for short ). It further appears that the Director General of Posts, India and the Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Posts, Ministry of Communication have issued necessary instructions in respect of sale and procedure to be followed pursuant to issuance of Indira Vikas Patras. Those instructions are contained in Post Office Savings Bank Manual, Vol. II. Rule 5 of the Rules prescribes procedure for purchase of a Certificate. Rule 6 provides for issue of a Certificate and states that on payment being made under Rule 5, a certificate shall be issued immediately and the date of issue of such certificate shall be the date of payment. As per sub-rule (2) of Rule 6, if for any reason a certificate cannot be issued immediately, a provisional receipt shall be given to the purchaser, which may later be exchanged for a certificate by the person holding the provisional receipt. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 provides that a certificate issued under this rule is transferable. Rule 7 deals with replacement of certificate. Under sub-rule (1) of Rule 7, if a certificate is mutilated or defaced, the bearer is entitled for replacement from the Post Office of issue on payment of fee of rupee one. However, under sub-rule (2) of Rule 7, a certificate lost, stolen, mutilated, defaced or destroyed beyond recognition, will not be replaced by any Post Office. Under sub-rule (1) of Rule 7, if a certificate is mutilated or defaced, the bearer is entitled for replacement from the Post Office of issue on payment of fee of rupee one. However, under sub-rule (2) of Rule 7, a certificate lost, stolen, mutilated, defaced or destroyed beyond recognition, will not be replaced by any Post Office. Rule 8 provides for encashment of certificate and states that a certificate of any denomination may be encashed at any time after the expiry of a period of five years from the date of issue by presenting it before the Post Office of issue, provided that a certificate may be encashed at any other Post Office if the Officer-in-charge of that Post Office is satisfied on verification from the Post Office of issue that such certificate was issued by the said Post Office. Under Rule 9, the person presenting a certificate for encashment shall sign in the space provided on the back thereof in token of having received the payment and indicate thereon the name and address. Rule 10 provides that the Post Office shall not be responsible for any loss caused to a holder by any person obtaining possession of a certificate and fraudulently encashing it. Rule 11 deals with the power to relax and provides that whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the operation of any of the provisions in these rules causes undue hardship to the holder of a certificate, it may, by order, for reasons to be recorded in writing relax the requirements of that provision in a manner not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. ( 7 ) ON a conjoint reading of the aforesaid Rules, the following position emerges: a certificate is transferable and can be replaced if it is mutilated or defaced, however, it is not replaced by any Post Office. A certificate lost, stolen, mutilated, defaced or destroyed beyond recognition will not be replaced by any Post Office. A certificate can be encashed any time after the expiry of a period of five years from the date of issue by presenting it before the Post Office of issue. A certificate lost, stolen, mutilated, defaced or destroyed beyond recognition will not be replaced by any Post Office. A certificate can be encashed any time after the expiry of a period of five years from the date of issue by presenting it before the Post Office of issue. In other words, a certificate is required to be presented for encashment and can be encashed at any other Post Office other than the Post Office which has issued the certificate and the Post Office shall not be responsible for any loss caused to a holder by any person obtaining possession of a certificate and fraudulently encashing it. In view of the aforesaid provisions of Rules, the petitioner who lost the IVP Certificates cannot claim replacement even though he has given the details about the IVP Certificates. Since the IVP Certificates are lost/stolen, naturally the petitioner is not in a position to present it before the concerned Post Office which issued the certificate. In that view of the matter, the question arises for consideration is, whether the petitioner is entitled to get the amount without presenting the IVP certificates from the concerned Post Office? ( 8 ) AS stated above, the Director General of Posts, India and the Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Posts, Ministry of Communication have issued necessary instructions in respect of sale and procedure to be followed pursuant to issuance of IVPs which are pertaining to the Post Office Savings Bank Manual, Vol. II which provides that an IVP lost, stolen or destroyed will not be replaced by issue of duplicate. Para 6 of the instructions provides that an issue and discharge register in the following form will be maintained in the post offices separately for each denomination and this Register will be kept by the Post Master in his personal custody after the office hours. FORM OF REGISTER