Complaint is filed on 18-3-2009
Compliant disposed on 10-6-2010
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
::AT:: KARIMNAGAR
PRESENT: HON’BLE SRI K. DEVI PRASAD, B.Sc., LL.B., PRESIDENT
HON’BLE SMT. E. LAXMI, M.A.LL.M.,PGDCA (Consumer Awareness), MEMBER
HON’BLE SRI. K. CHANDRA MOHAN RAO, B.COM ., LL.B., MEMBER
THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND TEN
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 52 OF 2009
Between:
Kunkumalla Krishna, S/o. Late K. Sadashivaiah, Age 25 years, Occ: Student, H.No. 3-1-172/1, Puranipet, Jagtial proper (Town), Karimnagar district.
… Complainant
AND
- The General Manager Telecom District, BSNL, Karimnagar – 505 001.
- The Chief General Manager Telecom, Door Sanchar Bhavan, Abids, Hyderabad -1.
…Opposite Parties
This complaint is coming up before us for final hearing on 12-5-2010, in the presence of Sri M. Mahender, Advocate for complainant, and Sri P. Ashok Goud, Advocate for opposite parties, and on perusing the material papers on record, and having stood over for consideration this day, the Forum passed the following:
:: ORDER::
1. The complaint was filed on 18-3-2009 under Section 12 of C.P. Act 1986. The brief facts of the case are mentioned below.
2. The complainant is the 4th son of Late Sri K.Sadasivaiah who worked as Telephone operator at Telephone Exchange, Jagitial and died on 28.4.1982 leaving behind wife and four sons namely K.Narendar, K.Jagadeeshwar, K.Prem Chandar and K.Krishna.
3. Subsequent to the death of complainant’s father, family pension was sanctioned to its mother Smt.K.Sadalaxmi with effect from 28.4.1982. But the complainant’s mother too died on 15.4.1999 as sequel to which her first three sons were sanctioned family pension till they attained the age of 25, as laid down under the relevant rules.
4. The complainant submits that now he being the last son of his father, is eligible for family pension under the rules. He avers that as his mother was illiterate she did not have knowledge regarding the departmental formalities to verify the records before her death with regard to particulars of family members recorded in the service book of the deceased husband.
5. The complainant has been representing to the opposite party for last seven years for sanction of family pension as entitled under the rules, but the opposite parties have been dragging on asking him to submit one or the other papers for settlement of his claim. However, he submitted all the papers required by opposite party and finally the Legal Heir certificate issued by Executive Magistrate Court, Jagitial (MRO, Jagitial) was also submitted as directed by opposite party on 10.8.2007. The said certificate was forwarded to CAO (Pensions), DOT-CELL office of CGMT Hyderabad. The CAO (Pensions) called for Service Book of the deceased Sri K.Sadasivaiah which was in the custody of opposite party no.1. Opposite party no.1 failed to submit the same as it was not traced in his office and the same was intimated to CAO (Pensions). The CAO (Pensions) returned the pension file to opposite party no.1 directing him to decide the family pension case at his end.
6. There after the complainant requested opposite party no.1 to sanction his family pension considering the Legal Heir Certificate. But instead opposite party no.1 asked the complainant to produce Succession Certificate from Court, only to harass him by harrassing the settlement. Actually Legal Heir certificate produced by the complainant is sufficient for sanctioning family pension as per Government standing instructions.
7. The complainant alleges that there are no bonefides on the part of opposite parties to settle his claim and so they are dragging on some pretext or the other without settling his just claim, which amounts to deficiency of service.
8. As such the complainant filed this complaint in this Forum on 18-3-2009 praying for direction to opposite parties to sanction family pension in favour of the complainant with arrears, to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation, Rs.10,000/- towards damages and mental agony and Rs.3,000/- towards legal expenses.
9. Opposite parties filed counter denying all the allegations made in the complaint. Opposite parties admitted that the complainant’s mother was sanctioned family pension till her death on 15.4.1999, whereupon the complainant submitted an application for grant of family pension. The opposite parties directed him to submit Form 14 duly attested in favour of the complainant for onward submission to CAO (Pensions). But on receipt of the said Form 14 the CAO (Pensions) observed that neither the deceased father nor the deceased mother had mentioned the name of the complainant as their legal heir, as required under CCS (Pension) Rules. As such the opposite parties requested the complainant to produce the Legal Heir Certificate (Succession Certificate) from competent court. But the complainant submitted Family Member Certificate and Legal Heir Certificate issued by MRO, Jagitial which is not sufficient to disburse the pension amount, as they are not admissible. The complainant was asked to produce Succession Certificate (Legal Heir Certificate) from competent Court of Law enabling him to claim pension benefit of Late Sri K.Sadasivaiah X-TO Jagitial.
10. Opposite parties denied that they advised saying that the pension will be sanctioned to the sons in order of their birth and that on their advice family pension was sanctioned to K.Jagadeeshwar and to K.Prem chandar till 1.2.2005 and that the complainant the youngest son is due for sanction of family pension. Opposite parties further stated that they did not harass the complainant by logging on, on one pretext or the other. Opposite parties further denied the statement of the complainant that Legal Heir Certificate is sufficient and no Succession Certificate is required for sanction of family pension. Finally opposite parties further refuted the allegations stating that there is no negligence on their part and so they are not liable to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and there is no cause of action to file this complaint as it is barred by limitation.
11. The complainant filed affidavit and PA reiterating all the allegations and prayers made in the complaint and denied the allegations made in the counter stating that the opposite parties deliberately ventured to deny his claim.
12. Opposite parties were absent regularly failed to file PA and forfeited their right to file PA on 10.2.2010.
13. The complainant filed documents marked under Ex.A1 to A27. Ex.A1 is the copy of letter from complainant addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt; 30.7.1999. Ex.A2 is the copy of Death Certificate Dt: 24.6.1996. Ex.A3 is the copy of Pension Payment Order Dt: 1.3.1983. Ex.A4 is the copy of letter from opposite party no.1 addressed to K.Narendar Dt: 28.3.2000. Ex.A5 to A7 are the copy of letters from opposite party no.2 addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 1.7.2000, 19.10.2001 and 27.12.2001. Ex.A8 is the copy of Pension Payment Order Dt: 12.1.2002. Ex.A9 is the copy of letter from complainant addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 14.3.2005. Ex.A10 is the copy of Form 14 with specimen signatures and photographs of complainant Dt: 4.3.2005. Ex.A11 is the copy of Family Member Certificate issued by MRO, Jagitial Dt: 4.6.2003. Ex.A12 is the copy of affidavit of the complainant notarized Dt; 3.3.2005. Ex.A13 is the copy of S.S.C. Memo of the complainant Dt: 26.5.1997. Ex.A14 & A15 are the copy of letters from complainant’s brother addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 15.9.2005 and 13.2.2007. Ex.A16 is the copy of Legal Heir Certificate issued by MRO, Jagitial Dt: 3.10.2006. Ex.A17 is the copy of letter from brother of complainant addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 22.3.2007. Ex.A18 is the letter from opposite party no.1 addressed to complainant’s brother Dt: 10.5.2007. Ex.A19 is the copy of letter from opposite party no.2 copy marked to complainant’s brother Dt; 28.5.2007. Ex.A20 is the copy of letter from complainant’s brother addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 4.8.2007. Ex.A21 copy of letter from opposite party no.1 addressed to the complainant Dt: 10.8.2007. Ex.A22 is the copy of letter from complainant’s brother addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 6.9.2007. Ex.A23 is the office copy of Legal Notice Dt: 13.3.2008. Ex.A24 is two original postal receipts Dt: 13.3.2008. Ex.A25 is the acknowledgement due card Dt: 13.3.2008. Ex.A26 is the copy of reply notice from opposite party no.1 Dt: 5.4.2008. Ex.A27 is the copy of Memo from Deputy Secretary to Government, Finance (Accts) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh Dt; 3.3.1970.
14. The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties if so what relief can be awarded to the complainant?
15. As per Rule 54 of Regulation of Amounts of Pensions clause 9 reads as follows:
Where a deceased Government servant or pensioner leaves behind more children than one the eldest eligible child shall be entitled to the family pension for the period mentioned in clause (ii) or clause (iii) of sub-rule (6), as the case may be, and after the expiry of that period the next child shall become eligible for the grant of family pension.
16. A perusal of above provisions make it clear that the children of the deceased are entitled to family pension as laid down under above extracted provision. The documents marked under Ex.A1 to A27 speak that heavy correspondence ensured between the complainant and opposite party for a long period from September 1999 to April 2008 resulting in the non-settlement of the complainant’s claim for want of Succession Certificate from competent court much to the frustration and mental agony of the complainant leading to this litigation.
17. A deep look into the records affirms that the opposite parties failed to trace the service book of the deceased father of the complainant which contains the entire information relating to family particulars of the employee and it is an essential document for settlement of claim with regard to sanction of family pension.
18. As alleged by the complainant, it is an in-disputed fact that CAO (Pensions) called for submission of Service Book of the deceased father of the complainant for settlement of claim of family pension. But opposite party no.1 who is the custodian of the said Service Book failed to trace it and submit the same to CAO (Pensions), whereupon CAO (Pensions) returned the file to opposite party no.1 to decide the claim at his end.
19. Opposite party no.1 in order to cover up his failure in tracing the Service Book directed the complainant to produce Legal Heir Certificate and later Succession Certificate from competent court which amounts to gross negligence and deficiency of service towards the complainant.
20. Opposite parties ought to have considered the Legal Heir Certificate (Ex.A16) produced by the complainant, which shows the name of the complainant as 4th son of the deceased and sanctioned his family pension as entitled under the relevant rules.
21. This complaint is within limitation as the cause of action arose on 5.4.2008 the day on which counsel for opposite party no.2 replied to the counsel for the complainant insisting for the production of Legal Heir Certificate (Succession Certificate) from competent Court of Law.
22. Besides opposite parties failed to file PA inspite of several adjournments granted on request and finally forfeited the right on 10.2.2010.
23. In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to sanction family pension to the complainant with arrears, to pay Rs.2,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs within a month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to Stenographer and transcribed by her, after correction the orders pronounced by us in the open court this the 10th day of June, 2010.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
NO ORAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN ADDUCED ON EITHER SIDE
FOR COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 is the copy of letter from complainant addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt; 30.7.1999.
Ex.A2 is the copy of Death Certificate Dt: 24.6.1996.
Ex.A3 is the copy of Pension Payment Order Dt: 1.3.1983.
Ex.A4 is the copy of letter from opposite party no.1 addressed to K.Narendar Dt: 28.3.2000.
Ex.A5 to A7 are the copy of letters from opposite party no.2 addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 1.7.2000, 19.10.2001 and 27.12.2001.
Ex.A8 is the copy of Pension Payment Order Dt: 12.1.2002.
Ex.A9 is the copy of letter from complainant addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 14.3.2005.
Ex.A10 is the copy of Form 14 with specimen signatures and photographs of complainant Dt: 4.3.2005.
Ex.A11 is the copy of Family Member Certificate issued by MRO, Jagitial Dt: 4.6.2003.
Ex.A12 is the copy of affidavit of the complainant notarized Dt; 3.3.2005. Ex.A13 is the copy of S.S.C. Memo of the complainant Dt: 26.5.1997.
Ex.A14 & A15 are the copy of letters from complainant’s brother addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 15.9.2005 and 13.2.2007.
Ex.A16 is the copy of Legal Heir Certificate issued by MRO, Jagitial Dt: 3.10.2006.
Ex.A17 is the copy of letter from brother of complainant addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 22.3.2007.
Ex.A18 is the letter from opposite party no.1 addressed to complainant’s brother Dt: 10.5.2007.
Ex.A19 is the copy of letter from opposite party no.2 copy marked to complainant’s brother Dt; 28.5.2007.
Ex.A20 is the copy of letter from complainant’s brother addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 4.8.2007.
Ex.A21 copy of letter from opposite party no.1 addressed to the complainant Dt: 10.8.2007.
Ex.A22 is the copy of letter from complainant’s brother addressed to opposite party no.1 Dt: 6.9.2007.
Ex.A23 is the office copy of Legal Notice Dt: 13.3.2008.
Ex.A24 is two original postal receipts Dt: 13.3.2008.
Ex.A25 is the acknowledgement due card Dt: 13.3.2008.
Ex.A26 is the copy of reply notice from opposite party no.1 Dt: 5.4.2008.
Ex.A27 is the copy of Memo from Deputy Secretary to Government, Finance (Accts) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh Dt; 3.3.1970.
FOR OPPOSITE PARTIES: -NIL-
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
