DATE OF FILING : 19.10.2009.

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.192/2009

Between

Complainant :  Parvathy,

K.R/68/2330,

Superannuated worker,

Manjumallay Estate,

Vandiperiyar.

Idukki District.

(By Adv: Babu Paul)

And

Opposite Party :

 The Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner,

Employees Provident Fund Organization,

Sub-Regional Office,

Chalakuzhy Building,

C.M.S. College Road,

P.B.No.36,

Kottayam District.

O R D E R

SMT. BINDU SOMAN (MEMBER)
 

The complaint is filed against the deficiency in service of Provident Fund Authorities. The petitioner is an employee of Manjumallay Estate in Vandiperiyar. Manjumallay Estate is a Tea Estate. This establishment covered under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Complainant after her superannuation from service claimed family pension. Opposite party had denied her family pension in the ground of absence of option in the scheme. On 10.4.2007 opposite party informed to the complainant that she had not exercised option to become a member of Family Monthly Pension Scheme. Thereafter on 29.3.2009, the complainant informed to opposite party that she had already made her option in the Monthly Family Pension Scheme on 9.5.1996. But still now opposite party did not sanction her monthly pension. Hence this petition filed before the Forum.
 

2. The opposite party filed written version. In the written version, the opposite party admitted that petitioner has joined in the provident fund scheme in 1.4.19970 and she left service on 31.12.2002. The opposite party in this written version stated that petitioner was not a member in Family Monthly Pension Fund, she never made such an option. Without an option, the opposite party could not provide monthly family pension to the petitioner.

3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?

4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and PW2 and Exts.P1 to P8 (series) marked on the side of the complainant.
 

5. The POINT : - The complainant was examined as PW1 and marked Exts.P1 to P6. Ext.P1 is a letter of opposite party stating that complainant had no right to receive monthly pension. Ext.P2 is a letter of complainant to opposite party that the complainant is eligible for getting Family Monthly Pension. Ext.P2(a) is the postal receipt of Ext.P2. Ext.P3 is a list of labourers who are opted in the Monthly Pension Scheme send by the Estate to opposite party. Ext.P4 is the Option Form copy. Ext.P5 is an acknowledgement receipt of Ext.P4. Ext.P6 is the copy of advocate notice issued by the complainant and its acknowledgement card. PW2 is a summoned witness of PW1, examined and marked Ext.P7 and Ext.P8. Ext.P7 is the copy of the Option Form of the complainant with a covering letter of employer. Ext.P8 (series) is the Form 3A.
 

The opposite party had no oral evidence. The opposite party admitted that the petitioner was an employee of Manjumallay Estate which is an establishment covered under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. The complainant had joined in the provident fund on 1.4.1970. She was retired on 31.12.2002.
 

The dispute is regarding the question of Family Pension Fund MembershipExt.P3 and Ext.P7 clearly shows that the complainant made her option in the Monthly Family Pension Scheme in 1996 itself before she attaining the age of 58.

Hence the petition allowed. The opposite party is directed to give Monthly Pension to the complainant as per Employees Provident Fund Scheme of 1998 within one month of receipt of a copy of this order.
 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 24^th day of February, 2010.

Sd/-

SMT. BINDU SOMAN (MEMBER)

Sd/-

I agree SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
 

Sd/-

I agree SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 - Parvathy

PW2 - E.M. Kuruvilla

On the side of the Opposite party :

Nil.

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 - Letter No.KR/KTM/68/2330/605987/AB:10(03) dated 10.4.2007, from the opposite party to the complainant.

Ext.P2 - Copy of the letter dated 27.3.2009, from the complainant to the opposite party.

Ext.P2(a) - Postal receipt of the Ext.P2 letter.

Ext.P3 - Copy of a list of labourers who are opted in the Monthly Pension Scheme sent by the Estate with a covering

               letter No.LL-7-MISC/00393 dated 9.5.1996 to the opposite party.

Ext.P4 - Copy of the Option Form signed (thump impression) by the complainant dated 8.5.1996.

Ext.P5 - Copy of the acknowledgement receipt of Ext.P4.

Ext.P6 - Copy of the advocate notice issued by the complainant and its acknowledgement card.

Ext.P7 - Letter No.LL.7/664 dated 4.2.2010, from the Manager, Pobs Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Manjumallay Estate to this Forum with the required documents.

Ext.P8(series) - Copies of Form 3A, the Contribution cards for currency periods from the year 1.4.1995 - 31.3.1996 to the year 1.4.2002 - 31.3.2003.

On the side of the Opposite party :

Nil.