In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.241/2010
1) Smt. Reeta Roy Chowdhury Malakar
@ Reeta Roy Chowdhury,
Joy-Jayanti Apartment, 122, Baghajatin Place,
P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata-86. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Dunlop India Limited,
Represented by the Company Secretary,
Kings’ Court, Flat no. 14 & 18, 46B, Chowringee Road, Kolkata-70071.
Having Corporate office at 46B, Chowringee Road, Kolkata-700071.
2) Dunlop India Limited,
Brach office-Sahaganj, P.S. Chinsurah, Dist. Hooghly. -------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 26 Dated 27-05-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant joined the o.p. company as cost trainee with effect from 4.2.1993 for a period of one year and was allowed a consolidated stipend of Rs.1500/- p.m. vide letter Ref. PKC/165/PM dt.2.3.1993 issued in the name of the complainant by the General Manager – Personnel of the o.p. company.
Complainant successfully completed her training for the said one year and her training period was extended for further one year i.e. up to 3.2.1995 and the consolidated stipend was increased to Rs.1800/- p.m. with effect from 4.2.1994 vide letter Ref. SKC/5088/PM dt.27.1.1994 issued in the name of the complainant by the General Manager – Personnel of the o.p. company.
The training period of the complainant was again extended for a further period of one year i.e. up to 3.2.1996 vide letter Ref. EPD/115/PM dt.1.2.1995 issued in the name of the complainant by the General Manager – HRD of the o.p. company.
Complainant thereafter was appointed as Accounts Officer, Head Office of the o.p. company with effect from 1.1.1996 vide letter Ref. No.SRR/164/BR dt.31.1.1996 addressed to the complainant and the condition of her service as well as the salary and other receivables by the complainant were also informed to the complainant.
The complainant worked with the o.p. company till 14.6.06 and tendered her resignation from service w.e.f. 15.6.06 vide letter of resignation dt.,14.6.06 duly received by the o.p. company.
Immediately before tendering her resignation from service the complainant used to serve the o.p. company as Assistant Manager, Salary and Provident Fund and the complainant used to draw gross monthly salary of Rs.9075/- and net salary of Rs.8305/- after deduction of P.F. and P. Tax with the following structure :
__________________________________________________________________________________
Earning:
(Rs) Total (Rs)
Basic 5500
H.R.A. 2200
Allowances 1373 9075
Less: P. Fund 660
Net Salary 8305
The complainant had to tender resignation from her service w.e.f 15.6.06 vide letter dt.14.6.06 addressed to the AVP Finance & Taxation of the o.p. company which was duly received and accepted by the o.p. company.
Complainant duly served the o.p. company uninterruptedly from 4.2.1993 till 14. 12.06 but the complainant did not get her salary from the o.p. company for some period intermittently during the tenure of her service to the o.p. company and sometimes the o.p. company paid salary to the complainant at lower rate than the actual salary structure, to which the complainant was entitled. O.p. company also did not provide any Provident Fund statement to the complainant during the last part of her service. Complainant also did not get the LTA and Leave Salary of a huge amount from the o.p. company.
The aforesaid outstanding dues and other allowances of the complainant was duly approved and certified by approved and certified by Mr. S. Ghose, the then AVP Finance & Taxation of the o.p. company vide statement dt.19.8.05. At the end of her service tenure the complainant also became entitled to the Gratuity amount as per terms of her service with the o.p. company.
Complainant after tendering her resignation from the o.p. company the o.p. company for payment of her legitimate dues vide letter dt.16.10.06 addressed to the Senior Vice President of the o.p. company mentioning interalia her entire claim in detail, which was duly received by the o.p. company.
Having received no communication from the o.p. company the complainant issued reminders one after another and continued her claim for payment of her legitimate dues from the o.p. company, but in vain.
Complainant wrote another letter addressing the Chairman of the o.p. company vide letter dt.27.10.09 with the same request and the said letter was duly received by the o.p. company. But the o.p. company did not respond to such letter as usual. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.ps. did not file w/v. and the matter was heard exparte.
Decision with reasons: