1.                         The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he joined as Rigger in the establishment of OP.1 from October, 2010 till January, 2016 and engaged at Utkal Alumina International Ltd., Tikiri and the OP.1 shifted his establishment to Surat, Gujrat.  It is submitted that during service with OP.1, the complainant was a subscriber to EPF and FPF vide A/c No.0032836/000/0013230 and the subscriptions were deposited with Ops 2 & 3 along with the matching share of OP.1 but when the complainant approached Ops 2 & 3 and submitted necessary papers for final withdrawal of EPF dues, the Ops are avoiding to settle the claim.  From the annual statement of accounts for the year, 2012-13, the complainant found that the OP.1 was not depositing the matching shares as required under EPF Scheme, 1952.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct OP.1 to furnish the accounts details in connection with deposits and Ops 2 & 3 to settle the claim in favour of the complainant.

2.                         The OP.1 in spite of valid notice neither filed counter nor participated in the proceeding in any manner.  The Ops 2 & 3 filed counter contending that the A/c. No.SR/SRT/0032836/000/0013230 is coming under the jurisdiction of EPFO, Regional Office, Surat and the Ops 2 & 3 has no role to settle the claim.  It is further contended that as per requirement the complainant may be directed to submit claim in Form-19 & 10C duly attested by the authorised officer of OP.1 to the Regional Office, Surat for getting the benefits.  Thus denying any deficiency in service on their part, the Ops prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                         The complainant as well as Ops has filed certain documents in support of their cases.  Heard from the A/R for the Ops 2 & 3 and perused the materials available on record.

4.                         In this case, it is a fact that the complainant was working under OP.1 from October, 2010 to January, 2016 at Utkal Alumina International Ltd., Tikiri and was a subscriber to EPF & FPF Scheme vide A/c. No.0032836/000/0013230.  The case of the complainant is that after shifting of establishment by OP.1 from Tikiri he requested Ops 2 & 3 for final settlement of his EPF dues but they did not settle the claim.

5.                         The Ops 2 & 3 stated in their counter that the EPF subscriptions of the complainant were deposited by OP.1 with EPFO, Regional Office, Surat and the Ops 2 & 3 has no role to settle the claims of the complainant.  The Ops 2 & 3 has also furnished the EPF statement i.e. Subscriber Ledger Card in respect of the complainant from the R. O., Surat. We have gone through the record and found that the said EPF A/c. belongs to EPFO, RO, Surat.  As the account of the complainant does not belong to Ops 2 & 3, in our opinion they are not liable to settle the claim of the complainant.  It would be better on the part of the complainant to submit claim in F.19 & 10C duly attested by the OP-1 to the RO, Surat for settlement of his claim.  As such, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of Ops 2 & 3.  It is not evident from the record that the complainant has furnished the claim forms before OP.1 and the OP.1 has signed the forms for onward transmission to EPFO. RO, Surat enabling them to release the claims.  In the above circumstances, we do not find any merit in the case of the complainant which needs to be dismissed.

6.                         In the result, we dismiss the case of the complainant.  Parties are to bear their own costs.

(to dict.)