Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1738 (ALL)

Preti Goyal v. State of U. P. and Others

2011-07-19

DILIP GUPTA

body2011
Hon’ble Dilip Gupta,J.—Advertisements published by the Joint Director of Education inviting applications for the post of Assistant Teacher Trained Graduate (L.T.) in Government Girls Intermediate Colleges mention that the application should be sent by registered post and they should reach the office latest by 5:00 PM on 31st January, 2011. It also makes it clear that in case application is received after the last date, it will not be accepted. According to the petitioner, the last date was subsequently extended upto 10th February, 2011. The petitioner claims to have sent the application form by registered post on 9th February, 2011 but the application has not been accepted as it was not delivered by 10th February, 2011. 2. This petition has, accordingly, been filed for a direction upon the respondents to treat the application form sent by the petitioner in time since it was posted prior to 10th February,2011. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Post Office will be an agent of the Department and the petitioner is not responsible for the delay caused by the Postal Department in delivering the letter. 4. This petition has been filed in July, 2011, when even according to the petitioner, the last date for submission of the application form expired on 10th February, 2011. If the petitioner was really interested, she would have immediately raised the grievance. It will, therefore, not be appropriate for the Court to interfere in the matter at this stage. 5. Even otherwise, the Full Bench of this Court in Neena Chaturvedi v. Public Service Commission, Uttar Pradesh & Ors., 2010 (9) ADJ 152 examined as to whether the Post Office will be an agent of the Department and it was observed:- “33. Apart from that insofar as the entire process of recruitment is concerned, may be in the office of respondent or any other body, which invites applications, if view is accepted that the post office becomes the agent of the addressee, the very process of recruitment itself would be frustrated. A contract between the sender and the post office cannot bind the addressee. Even otherwise accepting a proposition that the post office becomes the agent of the body which invited the applications would lead to manifest inconvenience and absurdity. A contract between the sender and the post office cannot bind the addressee. Even otherwise accepting a proposition that the post office becomes the agent of the body which invited the applications would lead to manifest inconvenience and absurdity. For how long would such body have to wait for receipt of applications sent by post to conduct the interview, or hold the examination and what happens in cases where the application is lost through transit. Therefore when applications are to be received by a particular cut off date assuming that there is an offer and acceptance, receipt of the application by that cut off date only would make the acceptance complete. 39. If applications are invited by addressee for an interview or recruitment from eligible members from the general public, by advertisement either expressly by one mode or more, one of which is post office, when an applicant chooses to send his application through post, though the letter is posted in time but delivered late after last date of receipt, the question that arises for consideration is:- “On an offer being made by advertisement, and an acceptance is sent by post, when does the acceptance become complete, on the date of receipt of the acceptance in the post office or its receipt by the addressee” On an advertisement being issued by the offeror inviting applications through post and the sender (applicant) sends application through post (acceptance) but the same does not reach by the date mentioned in the advertisement, will the postal rule apply? The offeror in such cases, apart from inviting applications also lays down as one of its terms, that applications have to be received by a particular date. The offer therefore made if any, is receipt of the application through the post by a particular date. The postal rule however applies, the moment an acceptance is posted through post, then the post office becomes the agent of the addressee (offeror). An advertisement inviting applications for examination or recruitment is merely an invitation to offer and not an offer itself. The person who sends his application by post or by any other mode assuming it is based on an offer, must send the acceptance by the particular date, in terms of offer. If it does not reach by that date, there can be no acceptance and the postal rule would not apply.” 6. The person who sends his application by post or by any other mode assuming it is based on an offer, must send the acceptance by the particular date, in terms of offer. If it does not reach by that date, there can be no acceptance and the postal rule would not apply.” 6. In view of the law laid down in the aforesaid Full Bench decision of the Court, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Post Office is an agent of the Examining Body and, therefore, the applications presented to the Post Office before the last date should be considered, cannot be accepted. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. _____________