An India Post office. Image for representation.
Credit: iStock Photo
Chennai: Not returning 50 paisa to a consumer and 'rounding it off' has cost the India Post dearly, which has been directed by a consumer disputes redressal commission to refund it, in addition to providing a compensation of Rs 10,000 to him for causing mental agony, unfair trade practice, and deficiency in service.
Also, the Kancheepuram district consumer disputes redressal commission has asked the Department of Posts (DoP) to pay Rs 5,000 towards litigation cost.
According to the complainant, A Manasha, he paid Rs 30 in cash for a registered letter at Pozhichalur post office near here on December 13, 2023, but the receipt showed only Rs 29.50. Though he offered to remit the exact amount through UPI, it was declined by postal personnel due to some technical issues.
In his plaint, he said lakhs of transactions happened daily and not accounting them properly had consequences including loss to the government and termed it illegal which caused him 'serious mental agony.'
The department submitted before the forum that due to technical issues, payment through digital mode could not be accepted, at that time, from the consumer and hence cash was collected from him. Also, it said 50 paise was rounded off automatically in the 'incorporated postal software' and duly accounted in postal accounts. The sum of 'automatically rounded off amount' is reflected separately in 'Counter Accounts Submission.' Hence, the complaint is not acceptable.
The DoP said: "It is submitted that if an article was booked for amount involving fraction amount less than 50 paise, the fraction amount will be ignored and will not be collected from the customers. Rounding off such fraction amount depends upon the total value of all articles booked by the customers."
After hearing both sides, the consumer panel said the act of the post office in collecting 50 paisa in excess due to a software issue amounted to unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act.
The district consumer commission directed the DoP to refund fifty paise to the complainant, pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental agony, unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
Also, it tasked the DoP to pay Rs 5,000 to the complainant towards cost of proceedings within two months from the date of receipt of the order (dated September 11, 2024).
The complainant, in his submission, had sought a direction to the DoP to return his 50 paise, a compensation of Rs 2.50 lakh for 'mental agony,' and Rs 10,000 towards cost of litigation. The DoP had termed the contention of the petitioner as devoid of merits and wanted it to be dismissed.