Date:24/07/2007 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/07/24/stories/2007072451620300.htm

Karnataka - Bangalore

Passport office pulled up

Staff Reporter

For deficiency in service

Deliberately delayed processing of application: complainant
Pay Rs. 2,000 as compensation, says forum

BANGALORE: A Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum here has held that the delay by the Regional Passport Office in despatching passports was a “deficiency in service.”

It has directed the Regional Passport Officer to despatch the passport free and also pay a compensation of Rs. 2,000 to the complainant.

K. Narasimhaiah of Chikkasandra filed an application for renewal of his passport and paid the requisite fee of Rs. 1,000 in March 2006.

There was no response from the passport office for long.

When he enquired, he was informed that his application had been closed on January 24, 2007.

He was asked to file another application and remit a fee of Rs. 1,000.

He then filed a complaint before the third Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum alleging that the passport office had deliberately delayed processing his application.

The Regional Passport Officer did not appear before the forum personally.

In a written representation, he said the passport had been sent to Narasimhaiah on March 23, 2007 but it was returned undelivered.

Then a letter was sent to Narasimhaiah asking for a self-addressed envelope and seeking the reason for not collecting the passport. The Passport Officer said the passport was not a commodity and did not come within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act.

However, the forum, comprising N. Srivathsa Kedilaya and D. Subhashini, observed that Narasimhaiah’s application had been lying in the passport office for over one year and there was no explanation for the inordinate delay. No document was produced to show that the passport had returned undelivered.

“Even now the opposite party (passport officer) is not prepared to deliver the passport,” the forum said and added that the officer “has taken recourse to hide and seek to avoid responsibility or liability.”

The form said, “If there is no such promptness or diligence and if it is ‘probabilised’ that the delay is unjust, certainly that conduct of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service.”