JUDGMENT SMARITA MOHANTY, MEMBER Complainant had sent one application for the post of Multipurpose Health Worker (Female) to the Chief District Officer, Balasore through Speed Post bearing No. EO 449928499 from Jagatsinghpur Head Post Office vide receipt No. 54103 dated 13.8.2012 on payment of Rs. 29/-, but the said application did not reach its destination i.e., CDMO Balasore. On 4.12.2012 the father of complainant filed one application before O.P. No. 1 regarding its non-delivery. After enquiry it was informed that the said Speed Post was wrongly delivered to CDMO Jagatsinghpur. Complainant alleged that due to negligent act of O.Ps., she lost her job. Therefore, complainant filed this complaint before the District Forum seeking direction to O.Ps. to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation towards loss and mental agony as well as to pay Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation cost. Notices being served, O.Ps. appeared and filed their written version. They contested on the point of maintainability of the complaint in view of Section 6 of Indian Post Office Act, 1898 and Clause 81 and 84 of the Post Office Guide, P-1. It was contended that on the very day O.P. No. 1 delivered in total 187 number of letters including 33 speed post articles to CDMO, Jagatsinghpur vide local dak through Sri Jayanta Parida, Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier. The allegation of non-delivery of Speed Post was enquired into and CDMO, Jagatsinghpur was requested to return the same vide letters dated 6.12.2012; 18.12.2012 and 8.1.2013, but there was no response. It was pleaded that O.Ps. have performed their part of duty and are not liable. Further, it was stated that complainant has not come with clean hands as the Speed Post article was sent on the last date of submission of application before CDMO, Balasore. It was not possible that the postal article registered on 13.8.2012 could have reached Balasore on the same day for consideration of application of complainant by the concerned authority. It was further pleaded that Post Office receives the article in pursuance of the Act and Rules made thereunder. Neither a contract simpliciter, nor a contract of bailment is brought about between the Post Office and the sender nor the Post Office and the addressee. The Post Office has no hire, no merchandise, nor commerce, nor does it act as a common carrier in carrying an article of thing transmissible by post. Neither a contract simpliciter, nor a contract of bailment is brought about between the Post Office and the sender nor the Post Office and the addressee. The Post Office has no hire, no merchandise, nor commerce, nor does it act as a common carrier in carrying an article of thing transmissible by post. In view of the above submissions O.Ps. are not liable and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. Taking into consideration the principle of natural justice and the benevolent character of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, learned District Forum directed the O.Ps. to pay the complainant jointly and severally Rs. 50,000/- for loss of job, mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000/- for the cost of the litigation within 45 days from the date of pronouncement of the order i.e. 12.6.2013. Being aggrieved with the said order, appellants who were opp. parties before the District Forum have preferred the present appeal. Heard learned counsel Mr. S.N. Nayak for the appellants as well as the authorized representative of sole respondent. Gone through the record, documents submitted by the parties, Judgment and order of the Forum below as well as the LCR. Also gone through the judgments referred by the parties in their support. Admittedly complainant had sent her application through Speed Post bearing No. EO449928499 on 13.8.2012 vide receipt No. 54103 on payment of Rs. 29/-. But the said application did not reach its destination. Thereafter, on 4.12.2012 complainant's father complained before O.P. No. 1 to enquire into the matter. After enquiry it was found that the said Speed Post was wrongfully delivered to CDMO, Jagatsinghpur instead of CDMO, Balasore. Complainant had claimed Rs. 3,00,000/- for the wrong delivery, before the Forum below. As per the provisions of Rule 66B of the Indian Post Office Rules of 1933, complaints regarding non-delivery of Speed Post articles are to be preferred within three months. In the instant case complainant complained beyond the stipulated period i.e. after 113 days. Further the amended Rule 668 provided that in case of delay of Speed Post articles beyond the norms determined by the Department of Posts from time to time compensation will be provided which shall be equal to composite Speed Post charges paid. In the instant case complainant complained beyond the stipulated period i.e. after 113 days. Further the amended Rule 668 provided that in case of delay of Speed Post articles beyond the norms determined by the Department of Posts from time to time compensation will be provided which shall be equal to composite Speed Post charges paid. It also provided that in the event of loss/misdelivery of Speed Post article or loss of contents or damage to the contents, compensation shall be double the amount of the composite fee Speed Post charges paid or Rs. 1,000/- whichever is less. At this stage it would be profitable to quote Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 which reads as follows : "The Government shall not incur any liability by reason of loss, mis-delivery or delay of, or damage, to any postal article in course of transmission by post, except in so far as such liability may in express terms be undertaken by the Central Government as herein after provided, and no officer of the Post office shall incur any liability by reason of any such loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage, unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his wilful act or default." Clause 84 of Post Office Guide, Part-I reads as follows : "Legal Responsibility of the Post Office - The Indian Post Office is exempted by law from all responsibility in the case of – (1) loss, misdelivery or delay of, or damage to, any postal article in course or transmission by post and (2) wrong payment or delay in payment by Foreign Postal Administration of money orders issued in India. In the case of money orders paid in India and of insured letters and parcels, the extent of the liability of the Indian Post Office will be found in the rules regarding these classes of business." In view of the above statutory provisions no compensation beyond double the amount incurred in the speed post or Rs. 1,000/- whichever is less are payable. In the, instant case respondent had paid Rs. 29/- towards the Speed Post Charges. Hence the respondent is entitled to receive Rs. 58/- only. The award of Rs. 52,000/- was in the circumstances at variance with law and has therefore to be modified. The order of the District Forum is therefore modified accordingly and instead of Rs. In the, instant case respondent had paid Rs. 29/- towards the Speed Post Charges. Hence the respondent is entitled to receive Rs. 58/- only. The award of Rs. 52,000/- was in the circumstances at variance with law and has therefore to be modified. The order of the District Forum is therefore modified accordingly and instead of Rs. 50,000/- as awarded by the District Forum, the respondent is entitled to get Rs. 58/- as compensation, cost of proceedings in this Commission is fixed at Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- cost awarded by the District Forum remains unaltered and as such respondent is entitled to get Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation cost, besides Rs. 58/- from the appellants. The order shall be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of this order or else the appellants shall be saddled with 12% interest per annum till date of payment or realization. The lower Court record be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jagatsinghpur forthwith. Ordered accordingly.