Suresh Chandra, Member—This revision petition has been filed by petitioner/complainant challenging the impugned order dated 24.08.2011 passed by the U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow (‘the State Commission’, for short) in Appeal No.2011 of 2008 whereby the State Commission allowed the appeal of OPs no.1 and 2/ respondents no.1 and 2 herein against the order dated 24.09.2008 passed by the District Forum, Etah in Complaint No.93 of 2007. Vide its order, the District Forum had allowed the complaint of the petitioner against the respondents no.1 and 2 but dismissed the complaint against the OP. no.3/respondent no.3, the State Bank India in terms of the following directions:-

“It is ordered to the opposite parties No.1 & 2 that to make the payment of Cheque No.831810 dated 23.12.2006 of amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 9% annually from the date 20.01.2007 to till payment within one month from the date of order. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 also ordered to make the payment of amount Rs.3,000/- as physical & mental harassment and amount of Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation within one month from the date of order. Complainant is directed to make available the above said cheque to the opposite party No.1 within 15 days from the date of order.”

2. Briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of this revision petition are that the petitioner received the cheque dated 23.12.2006 drawn on the State Bank of India under the scheme of U.P. Govt., namely, “Kanya Vidhya Dhan Yojana” for poor girls, which was deposited by the petitioner in her Saving Account no.1515935 with the OP post office at Awagarh on 20.01.2007. This fact is not disputed by the OP postal authority. It is also not under dispute that the cheque, which was for an amount of Rs.20,000/- was payable by the OP no.3, the State Bank of India, Tehsil Jasrana, District Firozabad (U.P.). After depositing the cheque with the OP post office for collection of the amount from the drawee bank, the petitioner/complainant kept on ennquiring about the crediting of the proceeds of the cheque into her saving account but could not get a satisfactory answer from the OP post office. Thereupon the petitioner gave a letter to the post office and also to District Magistrate, Etah and as per the averments made, no action was taken by the OP post office. Eventually, the cheque in question was returned by the OP post office after six months saying that the validity of the cheque had lapsed and obtained signature of the petitioner on plain papers on 01.06.2007 forcibly thereby indicating that the validity of the cheque had lapsed and as such, the proceeds could not be collected. It is the grievance of the petitioner that she had deposited the cheque with OPs no.1 and 2 on 20.01.2007 but because of carelessness and negligence on the part of the OP post office, the cheque was not presented to the drawee bank within its validity and hence she could not get the money under the scheme of the U.P. Government. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the post office, the petitioner filed a Consumer Complaint with the District Forum, Etah in which the petitioner prayed for direction by the District Forum to the OPs for payment of the cheque along with the compensation for her mental agony and harassment.

3. The OPs filed their written statement opposing the complaint. The contention of the OP no.3 Bank was that no such cheque was received in their branch as alleged by the complainant/petitioner and as such, it had no liability for encashing the same and hence, the question of any deficiency in service on its part did not arise. The OPs no.1 and 2 admitted that the cheque in question was deposited with respondent no.1 post office on 20.01.2007. It was submitted by them that the cheque was forwarded by the Sub Post Master for collection on 20.01.2007 through the Post Master, Etah Post Office, who in turn further sent to Post Master Firozabad vide registered