D.O.F:30/05/2017
D.O.O:29/04/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KASARAGOD
CC.No.109/2017
Dated this, the 29th day of April 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Kunhikrishnan. V
Mukthi veedu
Pothavur. P.O
Cheruvathur (Via) 671313 : Complainant
Kasaragod. Dist
And
Canara Bank
Nileshwar. P.O 671314 : Opposite Party
Kasaragod Dist
(Adv: Narayanan.B)
ORDER
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( as amended)
The facts of the case in brief is that the complainant is a Defence Pensioner and his pension amount is being collected through the A/C No.072 5101014483 of the Opposite Party Bank. The calculation of pension made by the Opposite Party is erroneous, due to which, the complainant is not getting the pension amount for he is actually entitled to .There is miscalculation in pension arrears under OROP, and in 7th CPC and revision or OROP . As per the PCDA circular No.555 dated 04-02-2016 the implementation shall be paid by the PDA in four equal half yearly installments within 6 months.
Accordingly the complainant is entitled to get a total of 1,36,696/- towards arrears, which includes Rs.1,08,592 being service pension and Rs.28,104/- being Disability pension. The quantum of one installment for which the complainant is entitled is Rs.34,174/- But instead of drawing such 4 installment, Opposite Party was sanctioning according to their whims and fancies. More over the complainant has not received the entire amount even though the 6 months already elapsed There is an amount of Rs.25,570/- is still in arrears . Since the complainant had doubt in the calculation of amount, he filed application for statement of account but it was not issued.
In the mean while the Central Govt. revised the OROP as on 31 05-2016, as per which the complainant is entitled for a monthly pension at the rate of Rs.22, 393/- but the Opposite Party was sanctioning at the rate of Rs.21,258/- In that account there is a balance of Rs.6,257/-.
The complainant had a service of 18 ½ years and 179 days till he retired due to disability. Even though the Opposite Party has calculated the pension on the basis of 18 1/2 years of service during the period from 30-12-2016 to 30.07.2017 , there after the service has been corrected as 18 years in the records. Even after that, the Opposite Party credited the amount as earlier and subsequently recovered an amount of Rs.8,217/- being the excess amount wrongly credited. In that account there is a balance of Rs.8,376/-. There after the Opposite Party illegally cut and recovered an amount of Rs. 2,436/- on 27.2016, from the account of the complainant .Therefore the complainant is entitled for a total amount of Rs.40,203/-+ Rs.2,436/- = Rs.42,639/-. When the complainant filed a complaint before banking ombudsman, the Opposite Party misled them, by stating that they had credited the entire arrears. But no amount is credited till date. The complainant filed complaint before defence pension adalat at Palakkad, on Nov.17, 2018, the Opposite Party was directed to produce statement of account but did not complied with.
Hence this complaint is filed for a direction to the Opposite Party to credit Rs.42,639/-, being the arrears , to the complainant's account and pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and costs. The Opposite Party entered appearance through their counsel, who filed written Version.
As per the version of the Opposite Party, the complaint is false, frivolous, speculative and not maintainable at law.
The Opposite Party admits the complainant used to receive his pension through them. But all other contentions are false and denied.
The contention that the complaint has a qualifying service of 18 1/2 years is not correct. As per the order dated 23.04-2010 issued by Sr. Account officer (P), office of the PCDA (P ), Droupathi Ghat Allahabad issued to the Opposite Party his qualifying service is 18 years . As per the Accounts of Statement the basic pension payable as per Circular 568 was Rs 5,820/-for 01-01-2006 to 30-06-2009 and the basic difference was Rs.1,387/- . From 01.07.2009, an amount of Rs. 5,361/ - was paid as pension and Rs.459/- was in arrears from 01-09-2012. He was entitled to get an amount of Rs.5,992/- from 24 .09 -2012 to June 2014 and an amount of Rs.6,108/- was paid (Rs.116/- in excess). From July 2014 to February 2016, the basic pension was Rs.7,655/- but paid only Rs.6.108/- . The basic pension is to be paid Rs.7,655/- but paid Rs.7,693/- as such Rs.38/- in excess. As such the 1/4th of 1st, 2nd and 3rd installment of the OROP arrears payable was Rs . 22,373/- and paid Rs.22,889/- each. An amount of Rs.526/- in excess. From 01.03.2016 to 30. 11. 2016, an amount of Rs.375/- paid in excess. As such the complainant is Iiable to adjust an amount of Rs.8,091/- which he had received from the Opposite Party in excess. The Opposite Party is paying the pension amount on the basis of the directions given by the authority and if there is any difference in pension amount of the complainant that is to be rectified by the defence department and as such Defense Authority is a necessary party in this case. The complainant had sustained no loss or mental agony. There is no service deficiency on the part of Opposite Party and the complaint is Iiable to be dismissed.
The Complainant filed proof affidavit in Iieu of chief examination and documents Ext. A1 to Ext. A5 series are marked. He was cross examined as PW1. The Ext . A1 is a copy of the Order No.12 (1)/ 2014/D ( Pen/pol) Part-II dated O7-11-2015 , Govt.of India Ministry of Defence, Department of Ex servicemen welfare Ext A 2 is the Personal Service Bio data and Calculation statement, Ext A 3 series are copies of the complaints , Ext. A4 series are copies of replies, Ext A5 series are Pass Books. From the side of Opposite Party, its Manager was examined as DW 1. Who filed proof affidavit in Iieu of chief examination and documents Ext. B 1 to Ext. B 5 are marked. Ext. B1 is a Copy of calculation statement of pension arrears payable from Jan-2006 to Sept. 2012 Ext B2 is a Copy of calculation statement of pension arrears payable from July-2014 to Nov. 2016. Ext. B3 is a Copy of calculation statement of 7th CPC arrears of pension from Jan-2016 to May. 2017 Ext B4 is a Copy of calculation statement of pension from July -2014 to May 2017 Ext. B5 is a Copy of calculation statement of Excess pension paid from Sept.-2012 to June 2014.
Based on the pleadings of the rival parties in this case, the following issues are framed for consideration.
1. Whether there is any service deficiency or negligence on the part of the opposite party?
2. If so, what is the relief?
For convenience, both the above issues are discussed together.
The case of the complainant is that the calculation of pension made by the Opposite Party is erroneous, due to that the complainant is not getting the amount for he is actually entitled to .There is miscalculation in pension arrears under OROP, and in 7th CPC and revision or OROP . As per the PCDA circular No.555 dated 04-02-2016 the implementation shall be paid by the PDA in four equal half yearly installments within 6 months.
The argument of Opposite Party is that they are paying the pension amount on the basis of the directions given by the authority and if there is any difference in pension amount of the complainant that is to be rectified by the defence department.
Here admittedly the Opposite Party is not in the habit of disbursing the pension in uniform manner. In many occasions they credited incorrect amounts towards the pension of the complainant. ln some occasions it was in excess. ln some other occasions it was lesser than the actual amount to be credited .This implies that the Opposite Party is negligent in disbursing the pension amount of the complainant.
As per the version of Opposite Party , the basic pension payable to the complainant as per Circular 568 was Rs 5,820/-for 01-01-2006 to 30-06-2009 and the basic difference was Rs.1,387/- From 01.07.2009, an amount of Rs. 5,361/ - was paid as pension and Rs.459/- was in arrears from 01-09-2012. He was entitled to get an amount of Rs.5992/- from 24 .09 -2012 to June 2014 and an amount of Rs.6108/- was paid (Rs.116/- in excess). From July 2014 to February 2016, the basic pension was Rs.7,655/- but paid only Rs.6.108/- as such basic pension is to be paid Rs.7,655/- but paid Rs.7693/- as such Rs.38/- in excess. As such the 1/4th of 1st, 2nd and 3rd installment of the OROP arrears payable was Rs . 22,373/- and paid Rs.22,889/- each. An amount of Rs.526/- in excess. From 01.03.2016 to 30. 11. 2016, an amount of Rs.375/- paid in excess. As such the complainant is Iiable to adjust an amount of Rs.8,091/- which he had received from the Opposite Party in excess.
Therefore it appears that the Opposite Party is careless in disbursing the pension amount to the complainant. There is no transparency also. They credit lesser or excess amount and there after recovers the excess amount from the complainant's account unilaterally. The Opposite Party has no case that they issued notice to the complainant regarding recovery of excess amount from the account. The complainant states that his application for statement of account was never attended by the Opposite Party. No statement of account is issued to him even though he had applied several times. The complainant is not a debtor of the Opposite Party Bank. He is a defence service pensioner and he availed the service of the Opposite Party Bank only for getting his monthly pension promptly. Evidently he is not satisfied with the service rendered by the Opposite Party. He was constrained to file a series of complaints but no complaint is attended properly. The complainant being an account holder is a consumer and he has a right to be heard but that is not seen to be houonred.
Here, regarding his claim of arrears in pension to be paid by the Opposite Party, the complainant could not establish his case convincingly, as he has no definite case in that respect.. It is interesting to note that in the original complaint , the amount of pension arrears claimed was Rs.1,52,662/- with interest , where as in the later stage it decreased and in the affidavit it comes to Rs.42,639/ - with interest.
The Complainant has furnished different calculation statement at different occasion . It may be because of his wishful thinking. Anyway he did not withdraw any of the statement by writing, at any occasion.
The best person to approve the correct calculation would have been the Defence Authority and they are not made party in this case .Therefore this commission is not in a position to accept any of the calculation statement submitted by the complainant or Opposite Party. The complainant is still at Iiberty to recover his pension arrears , if any, by approaching concerned authorities like Defence Pension Adalath etc.
The complainant has furnished a copy of the Circular No.555 dated 04.02.2016 issued by the Under Secretary to the Govt of India , office of the controller of defence Accounts (Pensions) regarding one rank one pension(OROP). The clause 17.1 of the additional instructions would read as follows : " No arrears on account of revision of pension shall be admissible for the period prior to 01.07.2014. Arrears on account of revision of pension from 01.07.2014. till date of its implementation shall be paid by the pension disbursing agencies in 4 equal half yearly instalments".
Here the complainant states that as per the PCDA circular No.555 dated 04-02-2016 , the implementation shall be paid by the PDA in four equal half yearly installments within 6 months.
But instead of drawing such 4 installment, Opposite Party was sanctioning the arrears, according to their whims and fancies. More over the complainant has not received the entire amount even though the 6 months already elapsed.
The Opposite Party did not denied the above aspect. They have no case that they had disbursed the arrears in 4 equal installments within 6 months.
Therefore considering the facts and circumstances of the case this commission is of the view that there is negligence and service deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party.
It is needless to say that due to the unwanted acts and omissions of the Opposite Party, the complainant suffered great hardship and mental agony.
The complainant estimates his damages to a tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- for his loss and hardships. This commission is of the view that Rs.20, 000/- would be a reasonable compensation.
In the result the complaint is allowed in part and the Opposite Party directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- towards costs to the complainant.
The time for compliance is 30 days from receipt of the copy of this judgment.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Copy of order Dt: 07/11/2015
A2- the personal service bio data and calculation statement
A3- series are copies of the complaints.
A4- series are copies of replies
A5- series are Pass books.
B1- Copy of Calculation statement, arrears payable from 01/01/2006 to 30/06/2014.
B2- OROP arrears payable from 01/07/2014 to 30/04/2016
B3- Calculation Sheet of 7th CPC arrears for the period 01/01/2016 to 30/11/2016
B4- OROP arrears payable from 01/07/2014 to 30/04/2016
B5- Excess pension paid wef 24/09/2012 to 30/06/2014
Witness Examined
Pw1- V. Kunhikrishnan
Dw1- Jayachandran.P.P
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
