DATE OF FILING-8.1.2013
DATE OF DISPOSAL-26.12.2013
O R D E R
Miss S.L.Pattnaik,President
The complainant alleges that he was an employee of the daily Odia Newspaper viz.Dainikasha for the period from 2000 to 2011 under the establishment code No.3073 and employee code No.72. It is further alleged by the complainant that he was the member under Regional P.F.Commissioner,Berhampur(Opposite Party No.2). Therefore, he is supposed to get yearly account slip from the Opposite Party No.1 against deposit P.F. by his employer . Despite several request the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 did not provide him the yearly account slip. He then approached to the Central P.F.Commissioner,New Delhi. The Central P.F.Commissioner,New Delhi in his letter dated 20/.8.2010 and 1.12.2010 instructed the Opposite Party No.1 to immediately provide account slip to the complainant, but the Opposite
-2-
Party No.1 and 2 remained callous. He in his letter dated 8.1.2013 wrote to send the account slip to O.Ps No.1 and 2 but that also did not yield any result. Finding no other way out,the complaint by way of filing the present consumer complainant prayed for a direction to O.P.No.1 and 2 to supply account slip with compensation and cost of litigation as a whole of Rs.60,000/- for the harassment, mental agony, loss and deficiency in service caused by the Opposite Party No.1 and 2.
2- The Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 entered their appearance through learned counsel and filed written version wherein it is stated that the annual statement of account in respect of Opposite Party No.3 has been issued up to 1998-99 with contribution thereafter crediting interest . But the Opposite Party did not submit the annual return for the period from 1999-2000. The annual return for the period from 2000-2001 to 2007-08 submitted by the Opposite Party No.3 which was received by the office on 7.1.2010. Despite several reminders the Opposite Party No.3 did not send the annual return for the period 1999-2000. It is further stated that on compilation it was found that the O.P.No.3 submitted in respect of six employees whereas the record shows that in that year payment was made to 17 employees by crediting contribution for the year 1999-2000. Therefore, the Opposite Party NO.3 has been requested vide letter No.2671 dt.18.1.2011 to submit the contribution for the year 1999-2000 in respect of all employees working in that ;year to enable for supply of account slip to each employees. In this regard an inquiry under Section 7A has been initiated against the establishment which is still continuing.
The Opposite Party No.3 filed its written version but does not prefer to take part in hearing on the date fixed. In his written version it is clearly stated that he has deposited the P.F. contribution as per employment strength up to date till December,2011 at the P.F.Regional Head Office, Berhampur, Ganjam.
3- The complainant in support of his case has filed certain documents which are marked Annexure A to G respectively. On the other hand, the Opposite Party preferred not to file any document in support of its case.
4- We have gone through the case in detail and perused the written notes of arguments filed by both the parties. We have also perused the documents filed on record . It is not disputed that the complainant was working under Opposite Party No.3 and he was the member of the E.P.F.Organisation. It is the duty bound on the part of the Opposite Party No.3 to deduct P.F.contribution from the concerned employee each month and same is to be deposited with the P.F.organisation in regular manner so that the complainant would be
-3-
eligible to get yearly account slip to enable him to know the contribution made towards his P.F.contribution. But it is the case of the complainant that he has not received the account slip for the period from 2000-2011,although his contribution towards E.P.F. has been deducted by the O.P.No.3 regularly for the said period. When he approached to the Opposite Party No.1and 2 to supply account slip for the said period, he was deprived of supplying the account slip. It is a statutory obligation of the Opposite Party NO.1 and 2 to supply account slip yearly to the employee concerned.
The Opposite Party No.1 and 2 have taken the plea that they have not received Annual Return in F-3A/6A for the period from 1999-2000 onwards from Opposite Party No.3. But the pleas, whatsoever, of the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 are not be accepted due to the fact that the Opposite Party No.3 has admitted to have submitted the annual return up to date till December,2011. The Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 have also not disputed the submission of the Opposite Party No.3. In view of the above admitted facts, we are to conclude that there is latches on the part of Opposite Party No.1 and 2 in supply of account slip to the complainant.
5- Moreover, there is ample power of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 to initiate legal enforcement on Opposite Party No.3 if the Opposite Party No.3 is default in submission of annual return to them in time. But no such legal proceeding is being shown to us to believe the submission of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2. Besides, the Central P.F.Organisation had interfered and directed to Opposite Party NO.1 and 2 for early sort out of the problem of the complainant. But the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 did not sort out it. Thus, taking the case from all its ramifications, we hold that there is negligence on the part of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 in considering the plight of the complainant for supply of annual account slip for the period from 2000 to 2011.
6- As regards to the status of the complainant as a ‘Consumer’, it is not disputed by the Opposite Parties. However, in this regard the complainant has filed a citation reported in AIR 2000 Supreme Court 331, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India have held that “ the employee member of Employees P.F.Scheme is a consumer and service provided by P.F.Scheme are ‘service’ under the C.P.Act,1986. Having regard to the above decision, we are at par with the opinion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the complainant is a consumer coming under the C.P.Act,1986 and the complaint filed by the complainant is a consumer complaint.
7- In view of the above and considered to the circumstance of the case, we are clear that there is negligence in duties and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party Nos.1
-4-
and 2 in supply of account slip to the complainant of about 12 years. As a result, the complainant has been deprived of the benefits provided under E.P.F scheme to him. We therefore admit that the complainant has to be suffered mental agony and harassment for the negligence and deficiency in service adopted by the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2. Under the above circumstances, the complainant is to be well compensated.
8. Hence, we order that the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 are to supply account slip for the period 2000 to 2011 in favour of the complainant within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. We also direct the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 to pay Rs10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) towards compensation and Rs.1000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant within the above period.
The case is disposed of accordingly. Copy of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost.
Dictated and corrected by me on this 26th day of December,2013.
Sd/- Mrs.Minati Pradhan Sd/- Miss S.L.Pattnaik
I AGREE(MEMBER) PRESIDENT
