ORDER (Per: C.C. Pant, Member) This appeal is directed against the order dated 25.05.2007 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 15 of 2007. Vide the impugned order, the District Forum has directed the postal department to pay registration charges of Rs. 32/-; compensation of Rs. 7,500/- and cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case, are that the complainant Sh. Umesh Chandra Joshi, applied for a post of Class IV employee in reference to an advertisement issued by the Principal, Government Post Graduate College, Augustmuni, District Rudraprayag. The application in prescribed form was sent by the complainant by registered post from Post Office, Augustmuni on 28.07.2006. The last date of submission of application was 31.07.2006. The registered letter reached the destination on 01.08.2006 and as such, the addressee refused to receive the same. The said letter was sent back to the complainant on 04.08.2006. It is stated in the complainant that the Government Post Graduate College, Augustmuni, District Rudraprayag is at a distance of 2 kms from the Post Office, Augustmuni. Even then, the postal department took four days’ time in the delivery of the registered letter. The complainant has alleged that this is deficiency in service of the postal department, due to which, he could not avail an opportunity of getting the employment. The District Forum allowed the complaint per impugned order as stated above. Aggrieved by the said order, the post department has preferred this appeal. 3. The respondent-complainant appeared in person. We have heard the respondent and the learned counsel for the appellant and considered their submissions in the light of the facts of the case and legal aspect of the matter in issue. 4. We are unable to understand as to why the respondent had sent the application by registered post on 28.07.2006, when only three days’ were left for the expiry of the last date of submitting the application for the post. The fact that Government Post Graduate College, Augustmuni, District Rudraprayag, is situated at a distance of 2 kms from the Post Office, Augustmuni, does not reflect any deficiency in service of the post department. Even if the addressee, to whom the letter is addressed, is at next door to the post office, it’s delivery will take due time. One should understand that the postal service is not a private delivery service. Even if the addressee, to whom the letter is addressed, is at next door to the post office, it’s delivery will take due time. One should understand that the postal service is not a private delivery service. Even in the case of private courier service, it has a system of receiving, dispatching and delivering the articles and it takes time. In postal service, even if the postal article is to be delivered to the next door to the post office, the postal article has to undergo the process of receiving, dispatching, delivering etc. and it also depends as to when the article was handed over to the post office. If the delivery van has left the post office by that time, the delivery may be delayed. If there is a holiday during the period of processing of dispatching, delivering etc., the delivery of the article may be further delayed. 5. In the present case, the registered letter was handed over to the post office on 28.07.2006. It was Friday. As is evident from the title of the complaint, Post Office, Augustmuni is a Sub Post Office and, therefore, the postal staff is also not sufficient. It also makes a difference as to where the postal article was handed over for delivery. Even in big cities, if one wants an early delivery, the Sub Post Office suggests to hand over the article to the main Post Office. Therefore, after passing through the process of dispatching and delivering, along with other postal articles received by the Post office on that day, the registered letter could be delivered to the addressee on 01.08.2006. The complainant’s application could not be treated as a special one. Neither it was known to the post office that it was to be delivered on or before 31.07.2006, nor there is any such postal system for personalized service. 6. For all these reasons, we are unable to make a view that the appellant had made deficiency in service. The respondent – complainant is not even entitled to receive back the registration charges because it is not a case, where the letter was not delivered, due to the negligence of the post department. 7. In view of above, appeal succeed and is to be allowed accordingly. 8. Appeal is allowed. Order dated 25.05.2007 of the District Forum is set aside and the consumer complaint No. 15 of 2007 is dismissed. 7. In view of above, appeal succeed and is to be allowed accordingly. 8. Appeal is allowed. Order dated 25.05.2007 of the District Forum is set aside and the consumer complaint No. 15 of 2007 is dismissed. No order as to cost.