BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Friday the 29th day of August, 2008
C.C.No.142/07
Between:
Sri. D. Sreenivasulu, S/o. Sri. Venkoba Rao, Ex.Employee, The Yemmiganuru Weavers Co-operative Production and Sales Society Limited,
No.Y-298, residing at House No.25/702, (upstairs), Sreenivasa Nagar, Nandyal,
Kurnool District. … Complainant
Versus
- R.D.O. Yemmiganur -Cum-The Chairman /Incharge,Yemmiganur Weavers Cooperative Production and Sales Society Limited,
No.Y-298, Adoni, Kurnool District.
- The Secretary, The Yemmiganur Weavers Cooperative Production and Sales Society Limited,
No.Y-298, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
- Employees Provident Fund Organization, Represented by its Assistant P.F. Commission, Sub-regional Office,
1/30, R.S.Road, Kadapa-516 004. … Opposite parties
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.Mohammed Ishaq, Advocate, for the complainant, and Sri.K.Kanteppa, Advocate for opposite party No.2 and Sri.L.Viswanadham, Advocate for opposite party No.3 and opposite party No.1 set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. K.V.H.Prasad, President)
C.C.No.142/07
1. This case of the complainant is fied U/S 12 of C.P.,Act seeking direction on the opposite parties to pay him Rs. 93,816/- towards the employees provident fund with interest at 24% p.a from 22-5-2007 up to the date of payment , Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony occurred at the deficient conduct of the opposite parties in not paying the above amount and cost of the case alleging the non settlement by opposite party No.2 the entitled E.P.F amount to the complainant when applied consequent to his resignation and inspite of clearing the cash deficit in cash transaction .
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant while the opposite party No.1 remained exparte by its absentention to the case proceedings , the opposite parties 2 and 3 contested the case filling their written version and seeking dismissal of the case .
3. The written version of the opposite party No.2 alleges that the complainant was found liable for cash deficit of Rs.11,132.36 /- and goods deficit of Rs.20,670.91/- when Ramachandra Rao took charge of the post of the complainant on the transfer of the latter and so a charge sheet cum show cause notice was caused on complainant for making good of the said deficits and the complainant instead of giving any explanation resorted to a writ and ultimately tendered his resignation and has under taken vide his letter dated 24-11-2005 to reconcillate the goods deficit to head office and sent a D.D for Rs. 5,035 and sought adjustment of Rs.6,097/- from his security amount of deposit towards the cash deficit and even after dismissal of his writ petition he did not made good of the goods deficit and so the opposite party No.2 is ready to pay the gratuity amount subject to adjustment of the above said deficit of goods amount from it if he applies for the same through his employer to Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Kadapa and as the complainant has made any such approach this case is not maintainable for want of proper cause of action and so seeks dismissal of the case.
4. The written version of the opposite party No.3 submits that the complainant did not submit claim form for settlement of the provident fund pension benefit and P.F contributions of the complainant as on 31-3-2006 was Rs.1.13,816/- and the said account will be settled with up to date interest on receipt of claim form from the complainant in the prescribed form No.19 and 10D as per E.P.F schemes and E.P.S scheme and the balance due from employers contribution will be paid on realization of the contributions due from the employer and so there being any defiency on its part seeks dismissal of the complainants case.
5. In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to A9 and swornn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of his case , the opposite party has side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.B1 to B 14 and sworn affidavit of opposite parties 2 and 3 in support of their defence.
6. Even though the written version of Ops 2 and 3 allege liability of the complainant for goods deficit , as at its conclusion says that there was no approach of the complainant for claiming payment of P.F amounts as prescribed under rules governing them and it shall be paid if approached properly as required under the rules and none of the documents marked by either side of the parties of this case envisage as to any proper approach by the complainant to claim P.F amounts , the Ex.A1 to A9 and Ex.B1 to B14 finds little relevancy for appreciation to work out any deficiencies of the Ops and there by to assess any lialbity of theirs for the complainants claim
7. The printed guidelines for filling up the application ( Form – 19) for claiming provident fund in its Sl.No.2 provides of the contingencies under which the application for provident fund could be made by employee and the guildeline at Sl.No.7 gives an exception to the practice of attesting and forwarding the claim application by the employer under whom the member was last employed saying that if the member is unable to send the application through employer or duly attested by him for any reason what so ever , he may forward the claim duly signed in the presence of any one of the authorized officials mentioned there under and got attested over his official seal .
8. As any such cogent material is placed by the complainant side as to submission of his application to the opposite parties for claming provident fund as required under the rules , the case of the complainant is reaming premature to asses any deficiency on the part of the Ops and so the case of the complainant is dismissed for want of proper cause of action
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 29th day of August, 2008.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. Certified Copy order in WP.No.26376/2005 dt.19.01.2007 of A.P. High Court.
Ex.A2. Office Copy of letter dated. 22.12.2005 of complainant addressed to OP2.
Ex.A3. Office Copy of letter dated. 22.05.2007 of complainant to OP2.
Ex.A4. Proceeding dated 02.01.2008 of OP2 addressed to complainant
Ex.A5. Notice dated. 22.05.2007 of OP2 to Complainant.
Ex.A6. Reply of Complainant dated. 09.06.2007 to OP2 along with Postal acknowledgement .
Ex.A7. Xerox Copy of DD Dated 05.12.2005 for Rs.5,000/- along with bank voucher.
Ex.A8. Letter dated 22-05-2007 of complainant to OP.2.
Ex.A9. Xerox coy of subscribes annual statements of Account for the
Year 2004-2005 to 2005 -06.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Proceedings dated 10.10.2005 addressed to
V.Ramchandra Rao, Manager.
Ex.B2. Proceedings dated 26.10.2005 addressed to complainant
Ex.B3. Telegram OP2 dated 18.11.2005 called to complainant
Ex.B4. Cash balance particulars Dt.23.11.2005 addressed to OP4.
Ex.B5. Letter Dt. 23.11.2005 of V.Ramchandra Rao to OP2.
Ex.B6. Letter Dt. 23.11.2005 of Ramchandra Rao addressed to Secretary as to the reliving of complainant.
Ex.B7. Stock of goods of sale Counter Nandyal on 16-11-2005, 17-11-2005, 18-11-2005, 19-11-2005, 20-11-2005.
Ex.B8. Letter Dated. 24.11.2005 of Complainant to OP2.
Ex.B9. Charge Sheet Show Cause Notice Dt.24.11.2005 addressed to complainant.
Ex.B10. Certified Copy of notice in WP.No.26376/2005 dated 12.12.2005.
Ex.B11. The Affidavit of the complainant filed in answered WP.
Ex.B12. Letter Dt.22.12.2005 of complainant to OP2 as to the complainant.
Ex.B13. Notice / Show Cause notice dt.30.12.2005 to complainant
Ex.B14. Notice Dt.22.05.2007 to complainant (Ex. A5)
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
