Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

212/2011

Mr.Mohanamoorthy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Employees Provident Fund Organisation - Opp.Party(s)

P.Chandrasekar

24 Apr 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 18.03.2011

                                                                          Date of Order : 24.04.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP. : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.212/2011

DATED THIS WEDNESDAY THE 24^TH DAY OF APRIL 2019

                                 

Mr. Mohanamoorthy,

S/o. Mr. Margabandhu,

Selvavinayagar Nagar,

Kodur Village,

Ponneri Tk.,

Thiruvallur District.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                        

 

                                                                                                   ..Versus..

 

1. Employees Provident Fund Organization,

Rep. by its Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Legal),

Royapettah High Road,

Chennai – 600 014.     

 

2. Regional Provident Fund Organization,

Rep. by its Assistant Commissioner,

Sub-Regional Office,

R-40A, TNHB Shopping cum Office Complex,

Mugappair East,

Chennai – 600 037.

 

3. B.G.R. Energy System,

(Formerly known as GEA Energy System India Ltd.),

Rep. by its Managing Director,

Airfin Cooler Division,

Panjetty Village,

Ponneri Tk.,

Thiruvallur District.                                                ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                 : M/s. P. Chandrasekaran & 

                                                                 another

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 : M/s. S. Srinivasan & another

Counsel for the 3^rd Opposite party       : M/s. M. Kandasamy &     

                                                                 another

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the  opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays the 3^rd opposite party to remit the arrears of Provident Fund contribution to the complainant Provident Fund Account No.65489/08 from the date of his Appointment in the 3^rd opposite party management service till the date of his termination with 18% penal interest and prays the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and not implementation the provisions of the Provident Fund Act with cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he was employed under the 3^rd opposite party’s company from 16.07.1997 to 22.5.2007 as a welder and his last drawn salary was Rs.6,000/- per month.  While joining as a welder in the 3^rd opposite party, the company name was known as ‘GEA ENERGY SYSTEM (INDIA) LTD. AFC DIVISION_PANJETTY’.   The complainant submits that he was terminated from service without assigning any valid reason.  The complainant submits that due to his poverty and health condition, he was not able to file suitable industrial dispute for the termination of service against the 3^rd opposite party.  The complainant submits that he sent legal notice dated:16.11.2009  claiming gratuity and provident fund benefits for which, the 2^nd & 1^st opposite parties sent  replies dated:07.12.2009 & 11.12.2009 with untenable contentions.  Since the 3^rd opposite party wantonly and deliberately not paid any amounts, the complainant was compelled to file a petition for payment of gratuity before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Teynampet, Chennai – 6.  The complainant submits that already he was employed in one M/s. Kannan, Job and Labour Contractor, Gummidipoondi and there he was given Provident Fund Account No.TN/65489/8.  Evenafter long service from September 1997 to May 2007, the 3^rd opposite party has not remitted any amount towards provident fund.   The complainant submits that as on 01.04.2010, there is an outstanding of Rs.6,970/- in the name of complainant lying before the provident fund account establishes that after joining as a welder in the month of September 1997 the 3^rd opposite party remitted some amount towards provident fund.  The complainant submits that the 3^rd opposite party has not only credited the contribution towards provident fund but also, terminated the service of the complainant in the month of May 2010 without any reason.  The act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by  opposite parties 1 & 2 is as follows:

The opposite parties 1 & 2 specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that as per the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 / Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 with effect from 01.06.2003 while he was employed in M/s. Kannan, Job and Labour Contractor, No.216, GNT Road, Gummidipoondi – 601 201.  The complainant’s Provident Fund Account Number is TN/65489/08.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that as on 01.04.2010, there was an outstanding of Rs.6,917/- (Employees share Rs.5,313/- and Employers Share Rs.1,604/-) is in the name of the complainant under the Provident Fund Account.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that the complainant has not submitted any Claim Application to the 2^nd opposite party for settling his Provident Fund Account even after receipt of a detailed letter from the opposite parties 1 & 2 by the complainant.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that they have no knowledge of employment with the 3^rd opposite party has directed the 3^rd opposite party to furnish all the information concerning the Employment of the complainant and the Statutory deduction made if any.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1 & 2 and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by  3^rd opposite party is as follows:

The 3^rd opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.    The 3^rd opposite party states the 3^rd opposite party is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 formerly known as GEA Energy System India Ltd.  The 3^rd opposite party states that the complainant alleging that he was employed in the 3^rd opposite party company as a “Welder” from 16.07.1997 to 22.05.2007 and the 3^rd opposite party company has not remitted Provident contribution to his Provident Fund Account No.65489/08 and false and baseless.  The 3^rd opposite party states that the complainant has never been employed under the 3^rd opposite party.  There is no relationship with the complainant with the 3^rd opposite party as a ‘Consumer’.   The only relationship may arise as “employer” and “employee” and the dispute shall lie only under Industrial Disputes Act.  The 3^rd opposite party states that the allegation that the last drawn salary of the complainant is Rs.6,000/- is an imaginary.  The 3^rd opposite party states that the compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.   There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 3^rd opposite party and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is filed and document Ex.B1 alone is marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 & 2.    Proof affidavit of the 3^rd opposite party is filed and document Ex.B1 alone is marked on the side of the 3^rd opposite party.

 

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to the provident fund arrears with interest as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

Both parties field their respective written arguments.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he was employed under the 3^rd opposite party’s company from 16.07.1997 to 22.5.2007 as a welder and his last drawn salary was Rs.6,000/- per month.  While joining as a welder in the 3^rd opposite party, the company name was known as ‘GEA ENERGY SYSTEM (INDIA) LTD. AFC DIVISION_PANJETTY’.  Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 show that the complainant was a welder appointed in the month of September 1997 under the 3^rd opposite party and undergone training.   Further the contention of the complainant is that he was terminated from service without assigning any valid reason.  But the complainant has not produced any document to prove for his continuous service and termination of service.  Further the contention of the complainant is that due to his poverty and health condition, he was not able to file suitable industrial dispute for the termination of service against the 3^rd opposite party which was  not proved by the complainant even though for raising industrial dispute there shall be no court fees.  Further the contention of the complainant is that he sent legal notice dated:16.11.2009  as per Ex.A5 claiming gratuity and provident fund benefits for which, the 2^nd & 1^st opposite parties sent  replies dated:07.12.2009 & 11.12.2009 as per Ex.A6 & Ex.A7 respectively with untenable contentions.  Since the 3^rd opposite party wantonly and deliberately not paid any amounts, the complainant was constrained to file a petition for payment of gratuity before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Teynampet, Chennai – 6 as per Ex.A4 and filed this complaint before this Forum claiming provident fund.

7.     Further the contention of the complainant is that already he was employed in one M/s. Kannan, Job and Labour Contractor, Gummidipoondi and there he was given Provident Fund Account No.TN/65489/8.  Evenafter long service from September 1997 to May 2007, the 3^rd opposite party has not remitted any amount towards provident fund which amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice.   Further the contention of the complainant is that as on 01.04.2010, there is an outstanding amount of Rs.6,970/- in the name of complainant lying before the provident fund account establishes that after joining as a welder in the month of September 1997 the 3^rd opposite party remitted some amount towards provident fund.  Thereafter, wantonly discontinued the remittance caused great mental agony and hardship.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the 3^rd opposite party has not only credited the contribution towards provident fund but also, terminated the service of the complainant in the month of May 2010 without any reason.  But the complainant has not produced any record.  The complainant is claiming for direction to deposit the provident fund contribution in the account of the complainant with interest and compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

8.     The learned Counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 contended that that as per the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 / Employees Pension Scheme, 1995, the complainant was given Provident Fund Account No.TN/65489/08 while he was employed under M/s. Kannan, Job and Labour Contractor.    Ex.B1 is the details regarding the Provident Fund Account related to the 21 employees employed under M/s. Kannan, Job and Labour Contractor.  Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that as on 01.04.2010, there was an outstanding of Rs.6,917/- is in the name of the complainant under the Provident Fund Account.   Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that the complainant has not submitted any Claim Application to the 2^nd opposite party for settling his Provident Fund Account even after receipt of a detailed letter from the opposite parties 1 & 2 by the complainant.   Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that they have no knowledge of employment with the 3^rd opposite party and the statutory deduction and contribution.  

9.     The contention of the 3^rd opposite party is that the complainant has never employed under the 3^rd opposite party.  There is no relationship with the complainant with the 3^rd opposite party as a ‘Consumer’.  The only relationship may arise as “employer” and “employee” and the dispute shall lie only under Industrial Disputes Act.  The allegation that the complainant was employed as welder from 16.07.1997 to 22.05.2007 under the 3^rd  opposite party is absolutely false.   But on a careful perusal of Ex.A1 to Ex.A3, it is very clear that the complainant was employed as a welder from September 1997 and undergone training etc.  But the complainant has not produced any document to prove that he continued his service till 22.05.2007.  Further the contention of the 3^rd opposite party is that the allegation that the last drawn salary of the complainant is Rs.6,000/- is imaginary.  There is no iota of evidence produced by the complainant.  Claiming Provident Fund Contribution of the employer with interest without proof is not acceptable.   But it is the duty of the 3^rd opposite party to furnish all details.  The 3^rd opposite party even after receipt of notice from opposite parties 1 & 2 and even after filing this case and due petition for payment of gratuity by the complainant has not come forward to produce the document showing the details of employment, salary and termination of employment of the complainant amounts to suppression of facts and unfair trade practice.  Further the contention of the 3^rd opposite party is that the compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the 3^rd opposite party shall remit the Provident Fund contribution for the service period of the complainant in the Provident Fund account No.65489/08 of the complainant within one month with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The 3^rd opposite party is directed to remit the arrears of Provident Fund contribution for the service period of the complainant in the Provident Fund Account No.65489/08 of the complainant within one month with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of complaint (i.e.) 18.03.2011 to till the date of this order (i.e.) 24.04.2019 and the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 24^th day of April 2019. 

 

 

MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

		Copy of inter office Communication
		Copy of Certificate Engineer weldingsection
		Copy of performance appraisal Memo issued by the 3rd opposite party Production Department
		Copy of Petition for payment of Gratuity
		Copy of legal notice to the opposite parties
		Copy of reply letter by the 2nd opposite party
		Copy of reply letter by the 1st opposite party

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES 1 & 2 SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.B1

12.05.2004

Copy of the letter by the 2nd opposite party

 

3^RD OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.B2

10.11.2011

Copy of Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour – II, Chennai, the Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act

 

 

MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT