DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 1st day of July, 2020
C.D Case No. 28 of 2018
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
Sri Budhiram Nayk,
S/o Late Musai Nayak
At: Mangalpur (Part), Sindol,
Ps: Tihidi,
Dist: Bhadrak, Odisha
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. Assistant P.F. Commissioner (Account),
S.R.O, Keonjhar, N.H- 6 Pabitradiha, Keonjhar,
Odisha- 758001
2. Branch Manager, Bank of India
Baripada Lal Bazar,
Dist: Mayurbhanj, Odisha
……………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Sri Pravat Kumar Samal, Adv & Others
Counsel For the OP No. 1: Sri P. K. Mishra (E.O)
Counsel For the OP No. 2: Sri Subash Chandra Panda, Adv & Others
Date of hearing: 24.12.2019
Date of order: 01.07.2020
BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, MEMBER
This dispute arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the O.Ps.
The facts of the case as narrated in the complaint are to the effect that the complainant was an employee of Baripada Spinning Mill since October 1989 and being a bonafide employee he was enrolled as a subscriber under Employees Provident Fund vide member No. OR/3115/1596. During the year 2002 under unavoidable circumstances he left his service on account of VSS and subsequently submitted final withdrawal form to the Asst. P. F. Commissioner, SRO Keonjhar through his employer. After few days the final withdrawal was rejected by OP No. 1 assigning the reason that the said account has already been settled earlier for an amount of Rs 42,571/- by way of crediting the same to his SB account bearing No. 550110110110006858 held with Bank of India, Lal Bazar Branch, Baripada on 26.04.2012. The account as mentioned in their intimation was not of the complainant for which the complainant served a notice upon OP No. 1 requesting payment of his claim as the account number shown in the letter does not belong to him. Actually the complainant has opened the SB account with Bank of India, Daulatpur Branch bearing account No. 535510100004792. When the OP No. 1 did not settle the claim inspite of several correspondence the complainant finding no other way filed this case in the present Forum for admission and proper adjudication praying for settlement of claim by OP No. 1 along with cost and compensation.
OP No. 1 resisted the claim of the complainant and contested the case. In submitting written version OP No. 1 stated that the name of the complainant appears in the record available with Asst. Commissioner P.F, SRO, Keonjhar as Budhuram Nayak, S/o Dinabandhu Nayak and accordingly OP No. 1 has remitted the amount to credit the account number 550110110110006858 vide cheque No. 099513 dt. 18.04.2012 to Bank of India, Lal Bazar Branch, Baripada. Since the claim of the complainant has already been settled long back the claim raised by the complainant seems to be false and the answering OP does not have any other liability to pay to the complainant.
OP No. 2 objected the claim of the complainant and contested the case. In the written version OP No. 2 stated that the case is not maintainable against this OP as it has acted upon according to the advice issued by OP No. 1. According to the intimation letter issued by OP No. 1, the answering OP was advised to credit the amount to the SB account of Sri Budhuram Nayak of Vill/Po- Nayanakhanta, Bada Sahi, Dist- Mayurbhanj bearing No. 550110110110006858. As because the answering OP has acted upon according to the advice of OP No. 1, it is crystal clear that the OP No. 2 has not neglected in executing the order of P.F office and therefore not neglected in discharging its duties with due diligence. Hence the answering OP is an unnecessary party to this case since it has not caused any deficiency of service.
During hearing the complainant raised that his name is Sri Budhiram Nayak S/o Late Musai Nayak of Mangalapur Po- Sindol in the District of Bhadrak. He is having his SB account with Bank of India, Daulatpur Branch in the District of Bhadrak bearing No. 535510100004792 which has not been credited with the amount of Rs 42,571/- as stated by OP No. 1. On the other hand OP No. 1, in course of hearing, admitted that the settled amount of Rs 42,571/- has been wrongly credited to the account of Sri Budhuram Nayak, S/o Dinabandhu Nayak instated of Budhiram Nayk S/o Musai Nayak and agreed to settle the claim soon after receipt of final order from the esteemed Dist. Forum Bhadrak. On perusal of records it is seen that the account number of the complainant is 535510100004792 which is different from the account number credited with the settled amount.
From the facts and figures as discussed above this Forum holds that the amount due to the complainant shall immediately be paid by the OP No. 1.
ORDER
In the result, the complaint be and the same is allowed against the OP No. 1. OP No. 1 is directed to pay Rs 42,571/- along with interest at the prevailing rate applicable on P.F deposits on the date of settlement of claim from 26.04.2012 till the date of payment on the settled amount and Rs 2,000/- as cost of litigation within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which OP No. 1 shall be liable to pay additional interest @ 6% PA from the date of order till the date of payment.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 1st July, 2020 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
