DATE OF FILING : 28-08-2012.
DATE OF S/R : 27-09-2012.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 27-12-2012.
Punam Chand Verma,
B-17 Cable Colony, Post – Fort Gloster,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711310. ---------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. M/S. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd.,
( Cable Works )
P.O. Fort Gloster, Howrah,
PIN – 711310.
2. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,
24, Belilious Road, Howrah,
PIN – 711101.-----------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986,
as amended against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service U/S 2( 1 )( g ), 2( 1 )( o ) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant, Punam Chand Verma, an ex employee of M/S. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd., superannuated on 31-12-2000 has prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to pay up the interest accrued upon his P.F. A/C bearing P.F. Code No. WB/1959/0D-10 for the period from 01-01-2001 till 05-02-2011.
2. The o.p. no. 1, M/S. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. in the written version
contended interalia that the P.F. accumulation exclusively falls under the jurisdiction of Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. Mill Workers Provident Fund Trust ; that the o.p. no. 1 has no liability to disburse the P.F. amount to the petitioner and the same is vested with the Board of Trustees of the said company ; that the complainant himself was not willing to receive the P.F. amount ; that the complainant did not vacate the official quarters. So the complaint should be dismissed.
3. The o.p. no. 2 in filing separate written version stated that the o.p. no. 1,
M/S. Fort Gloster Ltd. is an establishment covered under the E.P.F. and M.P. Act, 1952 ; that the said establishment is an exempted unit and being so the P.F. of the employees is maintained by the B.O.T. of the said establishment and as such the benefits under the said Act and Scheme are payable by the B.O.T.; that the o.p. no. 2 has no liability in releasing the EPF of the complainant and the interest thereof.
4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the complainant was the ex employee under o.p. no. 1. Admittedly the complainant received Rs. 1,15,136.57 from the o.p. no. 1 as his savings in the P.F. A/C vide cheque no. 856788 dated 05-02-2011. The apple of discord is the interest as accrued in his P.F. A/C for the period from 02-01-2001 to 05-02-2011 amounting to Rs. 1,62,000/-. It is the contention of the o.p. no. 1 that they are not liable to pay the interest as the complainant himself refused to receive the cheque on several dates. It is further contended that the Board of Trustee is the sole authority to settle the dispute.
6. Be that as it may, it transpires from the enclosures that M/S. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. having its Code No. WB/1959 is an establishment covered under the EPF and MP Act, 1952 and accordingly the Schemes were framed. This establishment is an exempted unit and being so the P.F. of the employees of the concerned establishment is maintained by the Board of Trustees of the said establishment and as such the benefits under the said Act and Schemes are payable by the Board of Trustees.
7. In view of the provisions as laid down U/S 27 AA of the E.P.F. Scheme, 1952 ( Annendix A, Condition no. 12 ) the P.F. Authority namely the o.p. no. 2 has no liability whatsoever regarding payment of dues of the concerned employee and as such the P.F. Authority should be considered in disposing of the complaint as non-est. The letter dated 23-09-2009 reveals that the o.p. no. 2 requested the o.p. no. 1 for settling up the dispute. In reply the o.p. no. 1 vide letter dated 20-02-2011 stated the cheque was not released to the complainant as he did not vacate the company's quarters.
8. On scrutiny of the materials on record we are of the clear view that settlement of the interest of the ex employee, the complainant is exclusively vested in the o.p. no. 1 and its Board of Trustees to which the employer i.e. the o.p. no. 1 is the chairman as per provision of paragraph 27AA of the EPF Scheme, 1952. The o.p. no. 1 being the chairman of the said Trustee Board cannot bypass its responsibility of payment of the PF dues together with up to date interest. We are of the further view that the o.p. no. 1 has no way escape from the rigours of law. Therefore, it is fit case where the complainant shall be granted relief as prayed for. Both the points are accordingly disposed of.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 99 of 2012 ( HDF 99 of 2012 ) be disposed of on contest against o.p. no. 1 and dismissed but without cost as against the o.p. no. 2.
The O.P. no. 1, M/S. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. be directed to clear up the interest accrued upon his PF savings for the period from 02-01-2001 till 05-02-2011 which approximately comes to Rs. 1,62,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order failing the amount shall carry interest @ 12% per annum till full satisfaction.
The complainant, a septuagenarian is further entitled to a compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony and prolonged harassment caused by the o.p. no. 1.
The O.P. no. 1, M/S. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. do pay the same together with the litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing the complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after the expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
