Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/58/2022

Sri. Surya Kanta Dash - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Accountant General A& E Orissa, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.R.K.Pradhan & Associates

01 May 2023

ORDER

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

                             CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 58/2022

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

 

Sri. Surya Kanta Dash

S/O- Sripati Dash

New Arya Samaj AN Guha Lane,

Po/Ps-Town, Dist- Sambalpur                                       ...………..Complainant

Versus

1. Accountant General A& E Orissa,

Bhubaneswar-751001.

2. Addl. Chief Engineer,

Canal Circle, Burla,

Near Post Murturn House,

At/Po-Burla, Dist-Sambalpur-768017.

3. The chief Engineer & Basin Manager,

Upper Mahanadi Basin, Burla,

Po/Ps-Burla, dist-Sambalpur-768017.

4. The Superintending Enginner,

Sundargarh Irrigation Division,

Sundargarh-770020.

5. Executive engineer,

Sundargarh Irrigation Division,

Sundargarh-770020.

6. Executive Engineer, Main Dam Division,

Burla, Dist-Sambalpur-768017.                                    …………...Opp.Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant      :-          Sri. R.K.Pradhan & Associates
2. For the O.P. No.1            :-          Sri. S.K.Patra, Advocate,
3. For the O.P. No.2 , 5 ,6   :-          Ex-parte
4. For the O.P. No. 4           :-          Sri. H.K.Babu, Advocate, Associates

 

Date of Filing:17.08.2022,  Date of Hearing :20.03.2023  Date of Judgement : 01.05.2023

  Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The case of the complainant is that the complainant was working as Senior Clerk in the Office of Executive Engineer, Sundargarh Irrigation Division, Sundargarh and superannuated on 31.08.2017. Prior to that the complainant was posted at O.P.No.6 and allotted with Quarter No.F-08/08 at Burla. Due to health problem in family the complainant could not vacate the quarter for which Rs.45,251/- was recovered towards penal license fees while working under the establishment of O.P.No.5. After retirement pension papers were submitted to O.P.No.1 without no demand certificate for no-vacation of Govt. quarter at Burla as a result the O.P.No.1 sanctioned Rs.74,670/- towards DCRG and adjusted towards license fees under head 0216.

The O.P No.6 submitted final bill for vacation of quarter vide memo No.5116 dated 13.6.2019 to pay Rs.40,176/- after expiry of two years . The O.P.No.1 was intimated detail facts vide letter No.1930 dated 20.9.2018 but the O.P.No,1 vide letter No.60219558 dated 16.10.2019 advised the O.P.No.6 to settle the matter.

The O.P.No.1 without verification recovered DCRG Rs.74,670/- without going through letter No.5116 dated 13.6.2019 of O.P.No.6 .The O.P.No.1 not received the DCRG deduction Rs.74,670/- - Rs.40,176 = Rs.34,494/-. After seven months lapse also no fruitful step taken. For the delay of payment from 2019 to 2022 the Opp.Parties are liable to pay interest @ 18% P.A.

2. The O.P.No.1 in its version submitted that the complainant retired from service on 31.8.2017. The O.P.No4 pension sanctioning Authority (PSA) vide letter No.1930 dated 20.9.2018 submitted pension papers of the complainant. The O.P.No.4 vide no demand certificate  (NDC) dated 14.9.2018 intimated  the outstanding rent of Rs.74,670/- to adjust from Death –cum- Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) . The O.P.No.1 vide Annexure B/1 dated 20.11.2018 authorised the O.P.No.4.

The O.P.No.4 vide letter No.2674 dated 1.7.2019 intimated the O.P.No.1 that Rs.40,176/- is outstanding against complainant . The amount of Rs.34,494/- was to be refunded which is taken excess vide Annexure C/I.

The O.P.No.1 vide Annexure D/I requested the O.P.No.4 to settle the matter at their level.

The O.P.No.2 vide letter No.637 dated 22.8.2022 requested O.P.No.1 for regularization of payment. The O.P.No.1 vide letter dated 15.9.2022 intimated O.P.No.2 to refund Rs.34,494/- with intimation to Dist. Treasury , Sambalpur (Annexure E/I).

This Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the Case. The complainant is not a consumer of the O.Ps and cited a number of decision that the O.P.No.1 is not providing any service to the complainant. In pension matter no service charge has been paid by the complainant.

3. Perused the documents filed by both parties. It is the admission of both the parties that Rs.34,494/- excess amount has been deducted from the complainant towards house license fees. The O.P.No.4 vide letter No.5069 dated 5.11.2022 intimated the O.P.No.2 that an amount of Rs.34,494/- has been drawn vide Bill No.209/2022-23 (Sundargarh Treasury voucher. No.01 dated 04.11.2022) and paid to the complainant. The prayer of the complainant has already been complied by the Opp.Parties.

The others prayer of the complainant is to fix up responsibility or to direct to pay 18% interest for the period 2019 to 2022.

4. Basing on the factual aspect of the case the following issues are framed:

ISSUES.

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer of the Opp.Parties and deduction of license fees of house rent of a govt. employee from Death cum Retirement gratuity is covered under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
2. What relief the complainant entitled to get ?

ISSUE NO.1 : Whether the complainant is a consumer of the Opp.Parties and deduction of license fees of house rent of a govt. employee from Death cum Retirement gratuity is covered under the Consumer Protection Act,2019 ?

Admittedly the complainant was a Government Service and quarter  was provided to the complainant. Against the allotment of quarter rent which is paid by the government. Further the death cum retirement gratuity is a condition of service of a government employee is guided by its service code. As per contention of the O.P.No.1 the delay in payment of house rent deducted out of death cum retirement gratuity is not covered under the consumer Protection Act, 2019. The matter can be raised before the appropriate admin9istrative tribunal or Civil Court for Redressal. The Govt. servant can not approach this Commission as he is not a consumer.

As a govt. servant the complainant is not a consumer of the Opp.Parties.

ISSUE NO.2 What relief the complainant is entitled to get?

As discussed supra, the complainant is not entitled for any relief as claimed for.

                   Accordingly, it is ordered.:

ORDER.

The complaint is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps. The complainant is at liberty to approach appropriate Tribunal/ Civil Court. No Cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on 1^st May of 2023.

Supply free copies to the parties.