Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/954/2016

Lt. Col P C Chandel (Retd.) - Complainant(s)

Versus

Central Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

S S Pathania Adv. & Mrs. Neeta Pathania Adv.

30 Nov 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	954 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	09.11.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	30.11.2018

 

 

 

 

Lt. Col. P.C. Chandel (Retd.), H.No.1119,  Sector 2, Panchkula (HR).  

             ……..Complainant

 

Versus

 

1]  Central Bank of India, SCO No.293-294, Defence Colony, Sector 35-D, Chandigarh (UT) 160035, through its Branch Manager.

 

2]  Principal Controller of Defence Account (Pensions), Draupadi Ghat, Allahabad 2110114

 

………. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN            PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        MEMBER

            SH.RAVINDER SINGH         MEMBER

 

For Complainant :- Sh.S.S.Pathania, Adv. for complainant.

For OP(s)       :- Sh.G.S.Bhandari, Adv. for OP No.1

                     Sh.Sudhir Nar, Adv. for OP No.2

 

 

PER RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

         Briefly stated, the complainant, a retired Army Officer, is having Savings Bank Account No.1074204365 with Opposite Party No.1, wherein he is receiving his Pension being Pension Disbursing Bank.  It is averred that the complainant retired from the cadre of Lieutenant Colonel in Army and has been placed in Pay bank-4 (Rs.37,400-67,000) with grade Pay of Rs.8000/- and MSP of Rs.6000/- vide letter dated 21.5.2009 (Ann.A-3). 

         It is stated that the complainant was being disbursed the pension of Lt. Col. But much less than regular defence officer.  It is also stated that till 29.1.2016, the complainant was being disbursed Rs.57,521/- per month when all of a sudden the pension was reduced/decreased to Rs.37,027/- per month without any reason or notice (Ann.A-4). It is submitted that on 01.08.2016, the Opposite Party No.1 debited an amount of Rs.8.00 lacs from the account of the complainant without any intimation, notice or reason for that, as a result the three cheques issued by the complainant were dishonoured (Ann.A-5 & A-6).  The complainant visited the OP Bank, moved applications as well as sent legal notice for reversing the entry of Rs.8.00 lacs, but to not avail.  Hence, this complaint has been filed.

 

2]       The Opposite Party No.1 has filed reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the Bank received a letter dated 22.2.2016 from the Assistant Controller, Office of Pr.CDA (Pensions), Allahabad stating that Lt.Col.Parkash Chand Chandel having PPO No.C/1196/1994 &  SB Account  No.1074204365 has been made overpayment (excess) of pension to the tune of Rs.1,7,82,451/-, which may be refunded to the official account of the department in compliance with the instructions of the RBI Letter No.DGBA.GAD.No.H-10450/45.03.001/2008-09, dated 01 June 2009 as circulated vide circular No.141, dated 07.12.2009.  It is stated that this fact was brought to the notice of the complainant and he was asked to get the written instructions to the Bank from the concerned authorities, but he did not brought any such instruction despite having full knowledge of the same.  It is also stated that the amount of Rs.8.00 lacs from the account of complainant was transferred to concerned authorities i.e. PCDA Pension, Allahabad, the government exchequer (Ann R-5 colly.).  It is submitted that the bank has rightly transferred the amount to the government exchequer from the account of the complainant, which was received by him in excess of the pension.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying other allegations, the Opposite Party No.1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint qua it.

         The Opposite Party No.2 has also filed reply stating therein that the complaint is not maintainable qua Opposite Party No.2 because the complainant and Opposite Party No.2, dealing with defence pension, do not have a relationship of consumer and service provider.  It is stated that moreover, regarding the relief of recovery and reduction in pension, the complainant had already invoked the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench by way of filing OA No.1033 of 2014 (Ann.R-1), which is still pending adjudication, therefore, the present complaint is not maintainable.  It is submitted that the PCDA (Pension), Allahabad notified Pension Payment Order based on the pension documents provided by Administrative Authority.  After notification of PPO, the same has been forwarded to Administrative Authority for verification for onward transmission to the Pension Disbursing Agency (PDA) i.e. Banks, Treasury, DPDO etc..   It is also submitted that the recovery was initiated by PDA as the overpayment was made by PDA.  Denying other allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.  

 

3]       Complainant also filed rejoinder thereby reiterating the assertions made in the complaint. 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties have also perused the entire record.

 

6]       After careful consideration of facts in issue, it is noticed that Sr.Accounts Officer, Pr.C.D.A. (Pension), Allahabad vide letter dated 15.2.2016 (Ann.R-2) addressed to Chief Manager, Central Bank of India, Centralised Pension Processing Center, Mumbai has emphasized, as under:-

“During the course of Screen Audit of Pension Payment Scrolls for the month of 5/2015, it is seen that payment of pension has not been made to the above named pensioner according to his entitlement due to which a huge amount of Govt. money has been excess paid to him.

It is, therefore, requested to please verify your records and calculate the amount overpaid to the pensioner from very beginning.  The amount so worked out may be intimated to this office immediately through return Fax (Fax No.-0532-2420281) as the matter is under consideration with Ministry of Defence, New Delhi.  The pensioner is drawing his pension under SB A/C No.1074204365.

         This may be accorded Top Priority.”

   

7]       Sh.Abhishek Singh, ADS, Asst.Controller office of Pr.C.D.A. (Pension) Allahabad, also vide his D.O.No.AT/Coord…., dated 22.2.2016 (Ann.R-1) addressed to Senior Manager, Central Bank of India, Centralised Pension Processing Centre, Mumbai, categorically issued directions as follows:-

“This is regarding refund of overpaid amount made to Sh.Prakash Chand Chandel holder of PPO No.C/1196/1994 & SB A/C No.1074204365, a Retired NCC Officer (Lt.Col.) on account of overpayment of pension according to a regular Commissioned officer.

In this context, your attention is invited towards your FAX dated 18.2.2016 (copy enclosed) according to which a sum of Rs.17,82,451.00 (Rs.Seventeen lac eighty tow thousand four hundred fifty one only) has been excess paid to the pensioner.

In this connection please refer to R.B.I. letter No.DGBA.GAD.No.H/10450/ 45.03.001/2008-09, dt.01 June’2009 circulated under this office circular no.141 dt. 07.12.2009 (copy enclosed) under which it has been stated that whenever…overpayment is detected by the bank, the entire amount thereof should be deposited in Government account in lump sum immediately.

I would be grateful if you could please look into the matter personally and deposit the overpaid amount in Govt. account in lump sum immediately by issuing a demand draft in favour of this office for settlement of these cases.”

 

8]       Both the abovesaid letters were brought to the notice of the complainant by Opposite Party No.1/Central Bank of India, Sector 35-D Branch, Chandigarh.  The complainant in token of receipt of copy of above said letters has appended his signatures thereon. 

 

9]       Admittedly, the complainant has never submitted any representation against the demand of recovery of over payment of Rs.17,82,451/- against him.  The Central Bank of India, Sector 35-D Branch, Chandigarh, is a pension disbursing authority.  The OP No.1 Bank only receives the pension and disbursed the same to the pensioner through its Savings Bank Account maintained in the bank.  The Bank/OP No.1 itself did nothing to fix, vary or revise any pension. It is only Pension Disbursing Authority of the department concerned, which settles the pension issues of any particular pensioner(s), as per instructions issued from time to time by Govt. of India.  In the present case, the Central Bank of India, Sector 35-D, Chandigarh has done no mischief but only complied with the directions issued by department concerned i.e. Pr.C.D.A. (Pension) Allahabad and deducted Rs.8.00 lacs from the account of the complainant and paid to Pr.C.D.A. (Pension), Allahabad vide Demand Draft No.101938, dated 01.8.2016. 

 

10]      Due to outstanding claim of Rs.17,82,451/- of Pr.C.D.A. (Pension), Allahabad, the three cheques dated 30.5.2016, 20.7.2016 & 5.9.2016 issued by the complainant, were not cleared apprehending siphon off the amount from the account before recovery by Govt.  The Opposite Party No.1 Bank has right to keep in abeyance clearance of any particular cheque/bank instrument to prevent any fraudulent transaction or in case there is any instructions or bonafide demand from Government about illegal or excess payment to the concerned account holder or if there is any government demand of any due amount from the person concerned. 

 

11]      The complainant has challenged the deductions from his pension before Central Administrative Tribune (CAT), Chandigarh Bench through O.A.No.060/01033/2016.  The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, vide its judgment dated 17.1.2018 have decided the matter on its merit and pleased to set-aside any reduction of pensionary benefits and consequential recovery from the applicants concerned and also recovering any alleged excess amount of pensionary benefits.  The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, however, its judgment have not granted payment of any interest in case of recovery of amount and later payment of the same back to the pensioner concerned by the government.  This Forum has no legal right to creep into the substantial issue regarding grant of any interest in such cases of pay-back of amount by government agencies.  The complainant has the right to agitate this matter before CAT, Chandigarh Bench by way of filing of review petition or otherwise.  

 

12]      It is pertinent to mention that the amount of Rs.8.00 lacs withdrawn from the account of the complainant on 1.8.2016 has been paid back in his account in compliance of order dated 17.1.2018 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench. 

 

13]      Keeping in view the facts under consideration, the complaint is found to be without merit and as such dismissed. No order as to costs. 

        Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, free of cost, as per rules. File be consigned to record room.

Announced

30^th November, 2018                                                              Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

                                                                                               

Sd/-

                                                                    (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER