State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Regional Provident Fund ... vs Kalyani Dash & Others on 15 September, 2008
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:ORISSA:CUTTACK STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:ORISSA: CUTTACK C.D. APPEAL NO.417 OF 2003 AND C.D. APPEAL NO.601 OF 2003 From an order dated 31.08.2002 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mayurbhanj in C.D. Case No.45 of 2001 C.D. APPEAL NO.417 OF 2003 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Orissa, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, Bhubaneswar. Appellant. -Versus- 1.
Kalyani Dash, W/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, At-
Gobindapur, P.O- Rajkanika, District-
Kendrapara.
2. Manorama Dash, D/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, W/o.
Rajib Pradhan, At- Lunahar, Friends Colony, P.O/P.S- Salipur, District-
Cuttack.
3. Urbasi Dash, D/o. Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, Mother-
Kalyani Dash, At- Gobindpur, P.O/P.S-
Rajkanika, District- Kendrapara.
4. Manoj Kumar Dash, S/o. Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, At-
Gobindpur, P.O/P.S- Rajkanika, District-
Kendrapara.
5. Sashirekha Dash, D/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, W/o.
Prasant Pani, At- Nusarsa, P.O/P.S-
Rajkanika, District- Kendrapara.
6. Manasi Dash, D/o. Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, W/o.
Tapan Tripathy, At- Kadua, P.O-
Balia, Dist- Kendrapara.
7. Manas Kumar Dash, S/o.
Ganesh Ch. Dash, At- Gobindpur, P.O/P.S-
Rajkanika, Dist- Kendrapara.
8. Tapas Kumar Dash, S/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, At-
Gobindpur, P.O/P.S- Rajkanika, District-
Kendrapara.
9. District Transport Manager (Admn.), OSRTC, Baripada, Dist- Mayurbhanj, At present OSRTC, Barmunda, Bhubaneswar, Dist-
Khurda.
10. District Transport Manager (Admn.), OSRTC, Cuttack, At/P.O- Cuttack, District-
Cuttack, Orissa.
11. Chairman-cum-Managing Director, OSRTC, Old Bus Stand, Bhubaneswar, At/P.O-
Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda.
Respondents.
For the Appellant : M/s. S.K. Das & Assoc.
For the Respondent nos.1 to 8 : M/s. S.N. Jyotishi & Assoc.
For the Respondent nos.9 to 11: M/s. P.K. Mishra (1) & Assoc.
C.D. APPEAL NO.601 OF 2003
1. District Transport Manager (Admn.), OSRTC, Baripada, District- Mayurbhanj, at present At/P.O-
Bhubaneswar, District- Khurda.
2. District Transport Manager (Admn.), OSRTC, Cuttack, At/P.O- Cuttack, District- Cuttack.
3. Chairman-cum-Managing Director, OSRTC, Old Bus Stand, Bhubaneswar, At/P.O- Bhubaneswar, District-
Khurda.
Appellants.
-Versus-
1. Kalyani Dash, W/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, At-
Gobindapur, P.O- Rajkanika, District-
Kendrapara.
2. Manorama Dash, D/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, W/o.
Rajib Pradhan, At- Lunahar, Friends Colony, P.O/P.S- Salipur, District-
Cuttack.
3. Urbasi Dash, D/o. Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, Mother-
Kalyani Dash, At- Gobindpur, P.O/P.S-
Rajkanika, District- Kendrapara.
4. Manoj Kumar Dash, S/o. Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, At-
Gobindpur, P.O/P.S- Rajkanika, District-
Kendrapara.
5. Sashirekha Dash, D/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, W/o.
Prasant Pani, At- Nusarsa, P.O/P.S-
Rajkanika, District- Kendrapara.
6. Manasi Dash, D/o. Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, W/o.
Tapan Tripathy, At- Kadua, P.O-
Balia, Dist- Kendrapara.
7. Manas Kumar Dash, S/o.
Ganesh Ch. Dash, At- Gobindpur, P.O/P.S-
Rajkanika, Dist- Kendrapara.
8. Tapas Kumar Dash, S/o.
Late Ganesh Ch. Dash, At-
Gobindpur, P.O/P.S- Rajkanika, District-
Kendrapara.
9. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bhabisyanidhi Bhawan, Orissa, Bhubaneswar.
Respondents.
For the Appellants : M/s. P.K. Mishra (1) & Assoc.
For the Respondent nos.1 to 8 : M/s. S.N. Jyotishi & Assoc.
For the Respondent no.9 : M/s. S.K. Das & Assoc.
P R E S E N T :
THE HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SAMANTARAY, PRESIDENT A N D SHRI SUBASH MAHTAB, MEMBER.
A N D SMT.
BASANTI DEVI, MEMBER.
O R D E R DATE:- 15TH SEPTEMBER, 2008.
Both the appeals are being disposed of by this common order, as they arise out of the common judgment passed by the District Forum, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in C.D. Case No.45 of 2001. By its order dated 31.08.2002, the District Forum directed the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bhubaneswar to pay rupees 40,000/- as per the claim of the complainant Ganesh Chandra Dash who was a conductor under the Orissa State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the O.S.R.T.C.).
It also directed the D.T.M. (Admn), Baripada to pay unutilized leave salary to the tune of rupees 39,694, adjustment without authority of rupees 16,192/-, penalty fine imposed without authority rupees 12,877.50 paise and other dues to the complainant.
2. The complainant was prematurely retired from service on 31.05.1993. He came to the District Forum after nine years i.e. in the year 2001 claiming his arrear salary, etc. and provident fund. The District Forum in its two page judgment and order passed the above directions to both the sets of appellants. Without taking into consideration as to whether the complainant was a consumer and such a complaint was entertainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complaint is entertained and order passed. The complainant is no doubt an employee under the O.S.R.T.C. and for his acts and omissions during his service tenure, he was prematurely retired and there was nothing before the District Forum, as we find from the order as to if he had preferred any redressal in any Forum against such premature retirement. In the settled principle of law that the employer and employee relationship is not that of a consumer and service provider. Besides, on a bare perusal of the judgment and order impugned, we find no reason behind such grant of relief to the complainant in the shape of pecuniary benefits. It has not been mentioned as to whether he was entitled to such benefits and if so on what counts and how the same was justified.
3. The learned counsel Mr. P.K. Mishra appearing for the appellants O.S.R.T.C. submits that he has specifically averred in paragraph 5 of the appeal memo that the amounts claimed by the complainant are not at all correct and the appellant Nos.1 and 2 i.e. D.T.M. (Admn.), OSRTC, Baripada and D.T.M. (Admin.), OSRTC, Cuttack had submitted their written version before the District Forum stating that the claim of the complainant had been settled and the claim presented by him are not at all maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. They had also stated that an amount of rupees 16,769/- has already been recovered from the retiral benefits of the complainant by appellant No.1 and a further sum of rupees 3,157/- is still outstanding to be receovered from the complainant and as such there is absolutely no dues payable to the complainant.
4. Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, the appellant in C.D. Appeal No.417 of 2003 submits that the complainant is to receive a sum of rupees 4,519/- towards his E.P.F. contribution which has already been deposited by the O.S.R.T.C. and since till date, no application has been received from the complainant or after his death from his legal heirs, the amount has not been disbursed and is still lying with the E.P.F. Commissioner. On receipt of due application from the legal heirs of the complainant, since the complainant has already expired in the meantime, the amount in deposit shall be disbursed to them.
5. This being the factual matrix and since the complaint is not maintainable in the Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, both the appeals are allowed and the original complaint No.45 of 2001 is dismissed.
Records received from the District Forum may be sent back forth with.
Date:-
15.09.2008 C.D. APPEAL NO.417 OF 2003 AND C.D. APPEAL NO.601 OF 2003