State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Air Force Group Insurance Society vs Ex. Sgt. Gajender Singh on 9 September, 2008
IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 09-09-2008 Appeal No. A-07/244 (Arising out of Order dated 01-03-2007 passed by the District Forum, Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi, in Complaint Case No. DF-VII/546/06) Air Force Group Insurance Society, Subroto Park, Delhi Cantonment, New Delhi 110010. . . . Appellant Versus Ex. Sgt. Gajender Singh, 432, Shanti Marg, Mandawli, Fazalpur, Delhi 110092. . . . Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR, PRESIDENT MS. RUMNITA MITTAL, MEMBER
1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Justice J.D. Kapoor (Oral)
1. The respondent who was an Airman and member of Air Force Group Insurance Society when he was in service was charged Rs. 18,750/- on his retirement towards the post retirement insurance cover effective from 1-3-2006. He protested and filed the instant complaint before the District Forum seeking refund of the said amount on the ground that after retirement he became a civilian and unless and until his option was obtained the aforesaid amount could not have been deducted towards the scheme known as Post Retirement Insurance Cover (PRIC).
2. The aforesaid plea found favour with the District Forum. Vide impugned Order dated 01-03-2007 the complaint was allowed directing the appellant to refund the said amount besides Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation and compensation.
3. Impugned order has been assailed mainly on the premises that the nature of the scheme as spelt out in the Administration & Management of Air Force Group Insurance Society received the sanction of the President of India. Rules 14 and 15 prescribe the nature of the scheme and stipulate as under:-
14. Nature of Scheme - The Scheme is compulsory in terms of AFI 16/87 to all personnel of Post- Retirement Insurance Cover-97 Scheme and retiring / proceedings on release/invalidation out of service with service/retiring/disability pension on or after 30 Apr 99 A/D hours.
15. The Scheme will be optional to the members of GIS-75 and RGIS-78 retiring on or after 30 Apr 99 (A/D hours) with pensionary benefits. In case balance is not available to recover the premia, the member will have to make good the difference by Demand Draft in favour of AIR FORCE GROUP INSURANCE FUND on or before his/her date of retirement.
4. However, the validity of the aforesaid rule has been challenged by the respondent on the ground that the appellant is not registered with IRDA for particular class of insurance u/s 3(1) of Insurance Amendment Act, 2002 and thus the Scheme itself is in violation of the said Act. Further that the appellant does not have any authority to enforce the scheme in question on ex-serviceman who is a civilian and that if at all it is a welfare measure it can only be offered and cannot be enforced or imposed on unwilling ex-servicemen.
5. As against this the appellant has taken resort to Rule- 16 under which it is a compulsory Membership of Group Insurance Scheme and contended that the respondent was a member of the air force and was availing the service offered by the appellant for insurance cover and certain subscriptions were paid to the appellant by the respondent which was to be released on his retirement after deducting a sum of Rs. 18,000/- for the PRIC Scheme. Apart from this the appellant has also produced the form in which the respondent had given his consent, which, however, has been denied by the respondent.
6. In our view the aforesaid scheme was a part of service conditions, as once the scheme had obtained the assent of the President of India and was made known to all the serving employees and retiring employees they were bound by the terms of the scheme. As a matter of fact, this scheme is for the benefit of the retiring employees and for life they would be accorded all kinds of facilities and for that purpose the insurance cover is very much necessary and for the whole of life the retired employee is provided medical facilities which even otherwise may not be part of the service conditions but by virtue of this scheme he is getting for whole of his life. It is not disputed that the respondent is availing all the medical facilities of the appellant.
7. Unless and until the aforesaid rules which have received the sanction of the President are declared null and void for the retired employee, he will be governed by the rules.
8. To say that once an airman retires he ceases to be a member of the force and becomes a civilian is not correct as the facilities he gets as a retired airman or ex-serviceman he gets them by virtue of his having remained a member of the force at one time and not otherwise. Such a scheme of insurance may be for the purpose of granting medical facilities incurring huge expenses sometimes and is for whole of life which, in our view, is for the general benefit of the retired employees and that is why such a scheme was made compulsory for the retired employees.
9. Once the scheme has been made compulsory by the assent of the President, the respondent cannot be given the option as to his willingness or not. Otherwise the very object of the scheme would collapse as it is a beneficial scheme meant for the welfare of the retiring personnel.
10. However, the appeal is being allowed subject to the condition that the entire amount deducted from the pension amount of the respondent shall be deposited with the insurance company, if already not deposited. The contention of the respondent that it is a non-public fund organization and is like a private society does not hold water as it is under the over all control of the Air Force and the sanction of the President of India was obtained before floating this welfare scheme and the fund collected by it is under the control and supervision of the Air Force. Therefore, it cannot be treated as a private organization.
11. Appeal stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. Impugned Order shall be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
12. A copy of Order as per statutory requirement be forwarded to the parties and to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to record.
11. FDR/Bank Guarantee, if any, be released under proper receipt.
(JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR) PRESIDENT (RUMNITA MITTAL) MEMBER HK