Karnataka high court High
Otherwise, every such lapse erodes the very confidence upon which public administration rests,” the court added in its Aug 19 order while dismissing a petition filed by the postal department challenging the orders passed by Karnataka as well as National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. “An ordinary citizen should not be made to run from pillar to post to realise money legitimately due to him. Bengaluru: Public trust cannot be lost in postal administration, Karnataka high court has observed.
A public institution entrusted with the confidence of the people must act with diligence, fairness and accountability.
Thereafter, for the next 24 years, PN Krishna and his family members were forced to litigate the matter. In 2007, Karnataka Consumer Commission and in 2024, National Consumer Commission ruled in favour of PN Krishna. However, the postal department challenged those orders.
After perusing the entire material on record, a division bench comprising Justices DK Singh and H Shanthi Bhushan noted that “what is even more disturbing is that the amount involved is a sum of Rs 1,62,034, and yet the postal department had to pursue the matter for years before the consumer forums and thereafter before this Court. We were, therefore, inclined to dismiss the present petition with exemplary costs. The Department, therefore, would do well to ensure that its officers strictly adhere to the prescribed procedures and that genuine claims of members of the public are dealt with promptly, fairly and in accordance with law,” the bench further added while dismissing the petition filed by the postal department.
The record further reveals that, during the pendency of the litigation, the original complainant (PN Krishna) unfortunately passed away and his legal representatives have been brought on record. A citizen should not be required to spend the prime years of his life pursuing a public authority for recovery of his own legitimate dues. However, having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we refrain from imposing costs and deem it appropriate to express our strong displeasure with the manner in which the Postal Department has dealt with the matter,” the division bench noted. “The Postal Department must ensure that such instances do not recur in future. Any lapse on the part of its officials in dealing with the savings and certificates of members of the public has the potential to seriously undermine the confidence reposed by the public in the Department. If such conduct is permitted to continue, the confidence of the ordinary citizen in the functioning of the Postal Department is bound to diminish.