State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Assistant P.F. Commissioner vs Chief Executive Officer on 23 June, 2008
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal BHABANI BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR) 31, BELVEDERE ROAD, ALIPORE KOLKATA 700 027 S.C. CASE NO-162/A/07 DATE OF FILING : 21.05.07 DATE OF FINAL ORDER:
23.6.08 APPELLANTS/COMPLAINANTS :
1.
Assistant P.F. Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization, Sub- Regional Office, Balai Commercial Complex, Benachity, Durgapur-713213, Burdwan.
RESPONDENTS/O.P.S : :
Chief Executive Officer, Alston Power Boilers Ltd, PO:- Durgapur, Dist- Burdwan.
Priti Ranjan Chatterjee.
K-11, Sagarbhanga Govt. Housing Colony, PO- Sagarbhanga, Durgapur-713211.
Dist- Burdwan.
BEFORE : HONBLE JUSTICE :
MEMBER : Shri. A.K. Ray.
MEMBER : Shri. P.K. Chattopadhyay.
FOR THE PETITIONER / APPELLANT : Sri P.R. Baksi (Advocate) FOR THE RESPONDENT / O.P.S. :
In person Shri P.K. Chattopadhyay., Member, This appeal arose out of DCDRF Burdwan case no 296/02 where the Complainant Sri Priti Ranjan Chatterjees case was that the Complainant was an employee of Alstom Power Boilders Ltd Durgapur who retired on 30.11.95 as a member of the employees PF scheme where he made monthly contribution , duly deducted from his salary ,every month which was deposited with the employees PF authority along with equivalent amount as employees contribution. Post 1986 87 he did not receive proper accounts statement from the PF fund authorities till his retirement. Upon retirement, on his application ,he was paid a cheque of Rs. 1,19,887/- but no supporting statement of accounts towards such payment was issued to him. On the basis of the Complainants calculations further amount of Rs. 1781/- was payable by the PF authorities for which the complaint was lodged, seeking compensation as well. OP No-1 viz PF authorities filed WO denying material allegations and stated inter alia that the entire accumulation having been paid and accepted by the Complainant, he had no right to further allegations as in the complaint. OP No-2 also denied any negligence of service and denied the Complainants claim as was made out in the complaint. The Ld. Forum after hearing both sides ordered as under that the case be allowed on contest. OP No-1 is directed to pay balance of Rs. 1781/-as balance credit of the complainant along with interest on that amount for the period from 1995-1996 to 2006-2007 as given by the Provident Fund Authority to other employees and OP No 1 will pay the same within one month from the date of order. There is no order of cost.
2. Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied with the impugned judgment and order OP No-1 in the Forum viz Assistant PF Commissioner, BPFO subdivision office Durgapur filed this appeal when it was stated inter alia that the Respondent /Complainant never demanded his statement of accounts and the entire outstanding dues on such having been paid without delay and or negligence, the finding of the Ld. Forum was not maintainable. It was further contended that the impugned judgement was totally unreasonable , unjustified and was liable to set aside on the grounds of limitation u/s 24 (A) and also on account of territorial jurisdiction. Accordingly the Appellant prayed for setting aside the impugned judgement of the Ld. Forum below and for such other orders as deemed necessary.
3. The Respondent no-2 viz Priti Ranjan Chatterjee entered appearance and submitted inter alia that OP No-2 in the Forum viz Alstom Power Boilers Ltd having complied with directions in the impugned judgement & order for its part, this appeal was not tenable . It was further contended that the issues relating to limitation on account of time and territorial jurisdiction have no legs to stand since the matter was once heard by the Honble State Commission and since remanded to the Ld. Forum below for jurisdiction on due evidence. On the point of accounts statement and short payment made to him the Respondent 2 maintained that this were matters of record and evidence there on , since not controverted and thus there was no final settlement of the given claim and accordingly, the Ld. Forums judgement and order was liable to be affirmed with such other orders as deemed necessary.
4. The matter was heard from respective sides when the Appellant reiterated his case and argued inter alia that firstly, the Appellant had no fault whatsoever in the matter of issuing /not issuing the given accounts statements since the Respondent no 1 viz Astorm Power Boilers Ltd was in turmoil for given periods of time and hence relevant feed back was not properly available. It was also argued that the amount of Rs. 1781/- ordered to be paid by the Forum was not on account of principle amount but on account of interest and the said calculation differed from the one made by the PF authorities where terms of instruction/ guidance as were issued by the Central Govt was strictly followed. The Respondent 2 in his argument laid bare the entire set of records he had painstakingly accumulated for all the relevant period in dispute and also referred to evidence filed in the Forum below deducing how the exact amount of his claim came to Rs. 1781/- . In such regard he also cited relevant provisions of Employees PF Account and Miscellaneous provisions account 1952 which clearly provided that the issuing of annual statement of members account was a liability of a PF authorities.
DISCUSSIONS (A) We have carefully gone through the records including evidence placed in the Forum below and find that the amount of claim of Rs. 1781/- being an amount not paid by the employees PF authorities ( Appellant herein) to the Complainant /Respondent for all this perioid since his retirement in 1995 is wholly justified on the basis of arithmetical calculations of what was due tobe paid and what was actually paid and the Ld. Forum did very correctly come to such conclusions on due evidence, records and calculations.
(B) The Appellants contentions on limitation of time and error of territorial jurisdiction are found hollow and without any merit whatsoever in so much so that firstly, the complaint was filed within time , and there was no error in territorial jurisdiction, so far provisions of CP Act 1986 as amended are relevant.
(C ) On the point of payment of interest as awarded by the Ld. Forum below, We find that the said factor of interest has not properly been quantified in the ordering portion of the impugned judgement. In our view the rate of interest payable on this amount of Rs. 1781/- should be the yearly rate interest for relevant years as are /were given by the PF authorities on the instructions and guidance of its superior authorities.
(D) Having considered the appeal and its contentions we find that there was no merit whatsoever in this appeal which effectively resulted in non payment of PF dues for Rs. 1781/- with interest for all this period under appeal to an employee who is a senior citezen too and therefore we are inclined to award an amount of cost of litigation for Rs. 1,000/- against the Appellant which is deemed fair and reasonable in the circumstances of the case.
Order The appeal is dismissed on contest . The impugned judgement and order of the Ld. Forum below is affirmed with modification that the amount of Rs. 1781/- would be payable by the Appellant viz Assistant P.F. Commissioner to the Respondent 2 namely Priti Ranjan Chatterjee with an amount of interest as was allowed by PF authorities for relevant period from 1995,1996 to 2006-2007, to be so paid within a period of 30 days from passing of this order along with an amount of Rs. 1,000/- towards cost of litigation. On default the Appellant would be liable to pay Rs. 100/- per day to the Respondent no-2 for the entire period of default.
Member Member