Case No. 168/2023   

IN THE MATTER OF

Anil Kumar Sharma age about 62 years S/o Late Rammurti Sharma R/o D-1 4^th Floor, Mahavir Residency Near Old Atrauli Bus Stand, Mahavir Park, Aligarh
 

                                                         V/s

1. M.D. DVVNL, Agra
2. Chief Engineer, Aligarh Zone office Aligarh
3. Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division II Lal Diggi, Aligarh                                                                                    

CORAM

 Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhayay, Member
3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for  the following reliefs-

1. The Op be directed to pay the leave encasement amount Rs 283908 with pendente lite and future interest @10% per annum from the date 1.4-2019 to till the date of actual payment.
2. The Op be directed to pay the amount Rs.250000 for compensation for harassment.
3. The Op be directed to pay the the Rs.25000 as litigation expenses.

2.  Complainant has stated that he is a retired employee of the Dakshnachal Vidhut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Ashok Kumar who was working as Lineman was seriously wounded while he was repairing the line on 13.12.2006 at about 9’o clock at the gate of Shyam Lotus Complex near Chandniya compound, Aligarh. He received injury at shoulder of his right hand and the right hand from wrist to elbow was completely amputed and right leg was fractured. Ashok Kumar filed a case no. 31/2010 before the Labor Court against the complainant who was posted as JE (I/C) incharge at Substation Ghanta Ghar Civil Court, Aligarh. Executive Engineer was also impleaded and both the complainant and the Executive Engineer were arrayed as defendant  no.1 and 2.   Ashok Kumar claimed damages at Rs. 500000. The commissioner directed the  defendants  to pay jointly by judgment and order dated 4.4.2014 to Ashok Kumar the compensation Rs. 283908 with interest @ 12% per annum. Defendant preferred appeal FAFO No. 918/2014 before Hon’ble High Court and matter was remanded by order dated 31.8.2017 to reconsider the claim. The Labor Court reheard the  case no. 31/2010  and passed the judgment order dated 7.7.2023 whereby it was held that the accident occurred during the period of employment of Ashok Kumar. It has become final by the courts that Ashok Kumar sustained injury during the period of employment of   Dakshnachal Vidhut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and he was held entitled for compensation for damages suffered by him in accident occurred while discharging the duties during the course of his employment. Complainant retired on 31.1.2019 and his leave encasement amount Rs.283908 was deducted from his bill without his consent. No dues certificate was issued to him by the office memo dated 30.3.2019 and it was subjected to the condition that the amount deducted shall be paid to him on passing the judgment by the courts. Complainant made representation dated 24.8.2023 to OP No.2 to release the amount Rs. 283908 which was illegally withheld. Complainant has further stated that he had served the department for a  consideration paid to him as salary. The provision of section 2 of the Contract Act provides that a person making the proposal is called the promisor and the person accepting the proposal is called the promisee  and every promise forming the consideration for each other is agreement. Promises which form the consideration for each other are called reciprocal promises. Complainant promised to render the service to the OP and the Ops promised to pay salary to complainant and thus both the premises are consideration and taking into consideration the reciprocal promises, complainant attains the status of consumer keeping in view the definition of consumer involving the term consideration. Ops has failed to discharge their obligations in terms of withholding the leave encasement Rs. 283908 and committed deficiency in service.    
3. Ops submitted in WS that Ashok Kumar has filed the case no. 31/2010 before the Deputy Labor Commissioner Aligarh whereby compensation Rs. 283908 was awarded by order dated 4.4.2014 and in Appeal No. 918/2014, Hon’ble High Court passed order on 31.8.2017 for reconsideration and Labor Court passed order dated 7.7.2023 in favor of Ashok Kumar. As per judgment of the court, it is proved that the accident occurred while doing the departmental work by Ashok Kumar under personal capacity of complainant. Complainant has been guilty for getting the work done by Ashok Kumar and accident took place while doing the work under him.         
4. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. Ops have also filed affidavit in support of their pleadings.
5. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
6. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?
7. It is evident from the judgment and order dated 7.7.2023 passed by the Labor Court annexure 3 of the complaint that the complainant was not held personally liable for reimbursement of damages caused to Ashok Kumar and it was held that the accident had occurred during the course of employment of Ashok Kumar which reads as under –
8. चूकि प्रतिवादी सं.2 के कार्य को प्रतिवादी सं. 1 द्वारा वादी से कराया गया था तथा कार्य करने के दौरान दुर्घटना घटित हुई थी।

अतः वादी अशोक कुमार का नियोजन प्रतिवादी गण के यहाँ होने तथा नियोजन के दौरान तथाकथित दुर्घटना में उसका विकलांग होना सिद्ध होता है। ”

It is clear that the amount Rs.283908 was wrongly deducted from the bill of the complainant after his retirement without his consent in respect of the case filed by injured Ashok Kumar and OPs have wrongly replied to the reprenstation made by the complainant to release the said amount and are liable for payment of said amount.

8. The question formulated above is decided in favor of the complainant.

9. We hereby direct the Ops to release the amount Rs.283908 illegally withheld by them with pendente lite and future interest at the 10% per annum. Ops shall also pay to complainant Rs.10000 as litigation expenses and Rs.10000 as mental harassment.
10. Ops shall comply with the direction within 30 days failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
11. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
12. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.