DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SUBARNAPUR
C.C. No.11 of 2020
Himansu Sekhar Panda, aged about 45 years, working as Asst. Public Prosecutor (Cadre) S.D.J.M. Court, Sonepur, At – Majhipada, Sonepur, P.O./P.S. Sonepur, District – Subarnapur
………….. Complainant
Vrs.
1. Regional Manager, Regional Office, Berhampur, Indian Overseas Bank, VOS Campus, II Floor, Vijay Bhawan, Engg. School Road, Berhampur, Pin 760010.
2. Branch Manager, Gajapathi Nagar Branch, Indian Overseas Bank, VOS Campus, II Floor, Vijay Bhawan, Engg. School Road, Berhampur, Pin 760010.
3. The General Manager, Personnel Administrative Department, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, 763, Anna Salai Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600002
………….. Opp. Parties
Advocate for the Complainant …………. None
Advocate for the O.Ps. …………. Sri B.K.Meher
Present
1. Sri U.N.Purohit, President
2. Sri H.Padhan Member
Date of Filing Dt.21.08.2020
Date of Hearing Dt.26.10.2022
Date of Order Dt.09.11.2022
J U D G E M E N T
By Sri U.N.Purohit, P.
The complainant being a consumer of banking service provided by the O.Ps. filed this complaint claiming refund of Rs.1,37,533/- to the complainant alongwith 18% interest per annum from 20.05.2020 till actual payment, compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for his sufferings on illegal act of the O.Ps. and Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.
The case of the complainant in brief that the complainant being Savings Bank Account holder of Indian Overseas Bank vide A/c. No.153001000057710. The O.P. No.1 Regional Manager, the O.P. No.2 Branch Manager, O.P. No.3 General Manager of Indian Overseas Bank as addressed provided in cause title. The O.Ps. are running business throughout the State, Branch at Sonepur District through its Branch at Birmaharajpur.
-: 2 :-
The complainant was working as Asst. Manager Law under the O.Ps. from 16.9.2013 to 13.03.2018. The complainant obtaining permission from the O.Ps. applying for written examination for the Post of APP. The O.Ps. vide Memo No.RO/PAD/177/40/2016-17 had granted permission/ NOC to the complainant with certain condition to comply on resignation from the Bank service after getting the said job. The complainant resigned on 13.03.2018 and joined as APP under Govt. of Odisha Home Deptt. posted at S.D.J.M. Court Sonepur. The condition of NOC was “ the Member has to give three months notice period/one month pay and allowances, as the case may be, in writing before discontinuing the service or resignation” for which the complainant has to pay one month pay and allowances i.e. Rs.48,844/- to the Bank but the O.Ps. illegally demanded Rs.1,37,533/- from the complainant. On 20.05.2020 the O.Ps. illegally deducted Rs.1,37,533/- from the account of the complainant without his consent. The complainant had never given any consent for aforesaid deduction he always claim to O.Ps. and requested for supply correct amount to be paid to the bank for the aforesaid condition of resignation. Instead of intimating actual and correct amount the O.Ps. deducted the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,37,533/- from the S.B. A/c. of the complainant.
The complainant protested through e-mail the action of the O.Ps. about illegal deduction of aforesaid amount without his consent. The complainant claims to refund the amount debited from his account illegally, but the O.Ps. not yet returned.
The complainant is valid account holder of O.P. No.2 he is being a customer is also a consumer of banking service. The O.Ps. while deducting the amount should obtain permission or consent of complainant. The deduction of aforesaid amount without consent amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps.
-: 3 :-
The case of the O.Ps. is that the O.Ps. carrying business being guided by RBI from time to time in his financial matter. The Officers service regulation has been framed by the Board of Directors of Indian Overseas Bank in consultation with R.B.I. and with the previous sanction of Central Govt. under Banking Companies (Acquisition and transfer of Undertaking) Act 1970.
The O.Ps. denied about the S.B. Account of the complainant they clear and mentioned that the complainant is not savings Bank Account holder but that is treated as staff savings Account . The accounts has been purposefully opened for encashment of salary and other payables by the Bank to the complainant. The complainant is not like other customer he is being employee of the undertaking the relationship between complainant and O.Ps. are employer and employee, the C.P. Act is not applicable as the complainant is not a consumer as defined in C.P. Act. The complainant submitted his resignation on 13.03.2018 without giving any notice as per Indian Overseas Bank Officers Service Regulation 1979. The complainant has produced a document and claim it is a No Objection Certificate which is addressed to the Chief/Sr. Manager Indian Overseas Bank R.O. Berhampur and not the complainant or to any one else concerned in general, it is the internal departmental communication having some error has been rectified subsequently. The complainant be required to produced original copy he has submitted his NOC while joining the Job as APP. The complainant resigned in his sweet will without giving any notice violating the conditions of service regulation of the terms and condition given in NOC on 23.03.2017 which is the letter of permission to apply and appear for written examination, interview for the post of APP. As per the condition of service regulation it is compulsory on the part of complainant to give three months’ notice before resignation or to deposit three months salary but the complainant not complied the same, resigned himself from service so the O.Ps. has taken recourse to deduct three months from the account of complainant with due notice through mail as per guide line of the Officers Service Regulation. The O.Ps. denied all the conditions of the NOC for discontinuing in service or resignation for
-: 4 :-
which complainant has to pay one month pay and allowances i.e. Rs.48,844/- to the Bank and the O.Ps. being illegal demand of Rs.1,37,533/- from the complainant. Though claims for the same they have issued NOC which speak “the Member shall give three months/one month notice as the case may be in writing before discontinuing his service or resignation.” In the NOC it has also stated that the complainant is also liable to pay all the dues including credit card dues if any to the bank to vacate the quarter, surrender, furniture fixtures provided to him alongwith credit card and ID Card but in the complaint petition, the complainant given miss statement stating three months’ notice period/one month pay and allowances instead of stating the true statement three months/one month notice as the case may be in writing before discontinuing the service or resignation. The NOC has been issued in standard format of Officers Cadre of Indian Overseas Bank Officers Service Regulations 1979. The complainant is bound to pay Rs.1,37,533/- as per regulation and the conditions of the regulation. The O.Ps. are being financial organization safe guarding the public money with utmost security public at larger they prompt efficient and courteous to his work. The O.Ps. rightly calculated and deducted the amount from staff account to safeguard the banking money.
The O.Ps. have duly intimated to the complainant through e-mail on 16.05.2020 the fact of debit of aforesaid amount as per regulations. The complainant further raise quarry and the O.ps. informed in the event of resignation without giving three months’ notice deduction of aforesaid amount is not illegal and that has been done in accordance with regulation. No question arise for refund of the deducted amount.
The complainant is a staff savings account holder he is an employee under O.Ps. Bank guided under Officers Service Regulation 1979 and he is not a consumer Indian Overseas Bank was rendering service free of charge to the complainant so the complainant is not a consumer hiring of service, thereby causing deficiency of service under C.P. Act does not arise, without complying relieving formalities from
-: 5 :-
Job, the complainant enjoying benefits of the amounts since the date of resignation. There is no cause of action for this complaint. The complainant filed the complaint wasting the time of this commission liable to pay heavy cost treating as vexatious complaint.
On the rival contention of both the parties the following question arises to decide this case :-
i. Whether the complainant is a consumer ?
ii. Whether the complainant is bound by the Service Regulation guidelines and three months’ notice and deduction of salary is mandatory ?
iii. Whether the deduction amount without consent is deficiency in service ? Or is there any exemption.
iv. Is the complainant entitled for relief claim ?
To meet question No.1 Firstly as it relates to Banking services and Section 2(7) (ii) hire or avails of any service for consideration which has been paid or promise or partly paid or partly promise or under any system of deferred payment and including beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promise or partly paid or partly promise or under any system of deferred payment when such service are avail of with the approval of the first mention person but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.
Section 2(42) “Service” Means service of any description which made available to potential users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, telecom, boarding or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any services free of charge or under a contract of personal service.
-: 6 :-
In this case though the complainant is an employee under O.Ps. the service in question and the dispute not related to the term and condition of his service it is relates Banking service provided by the O.Ps. for maintaining the Savings Bank Account and the deficiencies of service claimed by the complainant relating to the Savings Bank Account. So the complainant is a consumer and the disputes in question is a consumer dispute.
Deficiency – Define 2(11) - means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service and includes :
(i). any act of negligence or omission or commission by such person which causes loss or injury to the consumer ; and
(ii) deliberate with-holding of relevant information by such person to the consumer;
In the complaint the complainant claims he is an account holder of Savings Bank Account vide A/c. No.153001000057710 and he is making regular transaction, the affidavit filed by the complainant corroborated the complaint petition as well as the document which is the A/c. Statement filed by the complainant shows that he was making regular transaction of the same Savings Bank Account. So the complainant well proved that he is a consumer as defined in C.P. Act.
In answering question No.2 – Perused the guidelines, notes of argument filed by the O.Ps. the Indian Overseas Bank “Officers” Service regulations 1979 Page 20 and 21 termination of service Regulation 20(2) – An Officer shall not leave or discontinuing his service in the Bank without first giving a notice in writing of his intention to leave or discontinue the service or resignation the period of notice require shall be three months and shall be submitted to competent authority as prescribed in this regulation. Provided that the competent authority may reduce, the period of three months or remit the requirement of notice. ”
-: 7 :-
In this case the complainant intend to appear written examination for the post of APP Group-B for which he applied NOC from the O.Ps., the O.Ps. issued No Objection on 23.03.2017 by Sr. Manager First-line, J.K. Majhi, the original permission filed by the complainant shows permission has been granted with condition No.3 which arise this dispute i.e. the Member has to give three months’ notice period/one month pay and allowances as the case may be in writing before discontinuing/resignation. Further the authorities has also granted permission to the complainant on 19.06.2017 to apply & attend interview for the post of Lecturer and Asst. Professor. In both the permission/NOC the term and conditions of NOCs/identical. So it is proved that in case of resignation or discontinuing of service three months’ notice is not mandatory but the authority has right to exempt the same. In case the authority not granted any exemption in that circumstances the employee while resign from the post is to pay one month salary.
The complainant served as Asst. Manager of law under O.Ps. from 16.09.2013 to 13.03.2018 and joined as APP on 13.03.2018 for appearance in examination as well as interview, the authority has granted NOC/permission to the complainant on 23.03.2017 with a condition to give three months prior notice or one month salary in case of resignation from the bank. On perusal of the e-mail of the complainant dt.22.07.2020 at 11.02 A.M. disclose the above facts. Where the complainant claims that he is ready to spare one month salary as per the condition stipulated in NOC as he has no time to give three months’ notice to joined the newly assigned post. In this circumstances the condition of Banking Service Regulation of Indian Overseas Bank proviso clause is applicable which reduce the period of three months’ notice or remit the requirement of notice. Feelings the situation the O.Ps. should apply the proviso clause and give exemption to the complainant.
So far question No.3 is concerned relating to deduction of the amount without consent of the complainant is deficiency of service has already been discussed in earlier vividly, as the complainant is an Account holder and the
-: 8 :-
definition of deficiency well proved from the Account statement filed by the complainant shows an amount of Rs.1,37,533/- has been deducted without his consent though the complainant consented to deduct one month salary. So the O.Ps. are deficiency in their service which is supported by the documents and affidavit filed by the complainant and admission of O.P. deduction of amount without consent.
O R D E R
Hence we are directed the O.Ps. to returned Rs.1,37,533/- deducting one month salary of the complainant. Further the O.Ps. are directed to pay permissible rate of interest from the date of deduction of amount from the S.B. Account i.e. 20.05.2020. So far compensation is concerned as the complainant joined in newly assigned post and enjoy the service benefit, the deduction of amount will not cause any loss or injury to the complainant so we do not award any amount of compensation. The O.Ps. are directed to pay Rs.5000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant within two months. The complaint is partly allowed.
Applications pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for perusal of the parties.
File be consigned to record room alongwith a copy of this judgment.
Dated the 9th day of November 2022
Typed to my dictation
I agree. and corrected by me.
Sri H.Padhan Sri U.N.Purohit
Member President
Dt.09.11.2022 Dt.09.11.2022
