Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/555/2023

ROHIT MALIK - Complainant(s)

Versus

REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EPFO - Opp.Party(s)

SUDHIR GUPTA

11 Jun 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/555/2023
Date of Institution	:	28/11/2023
Date of Decision	:	11/06/2024

 

Rohit Malik S/o Sh.Shadi Lal Kapoor, R/o H.No.318, Sector 91, JLPL, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab presently residing at H.No.2165-D, Sector 63, Chandigarh-160062.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, EPFO, Bandra-II, 341 Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 (Maharashtra).
2. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, EPFO, Bandra-II, 341 Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 (Maharashtra).
3. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Accounts), EPFO, Bandra-II, 341 Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 (Maharashtra).
4. The Concerned Officer, EPFO, Regional Office, SCO 4-7, Bridge Market, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh-160017.
5. Managing Director, Zodiac Clothing Co. Ltd., Head Office, Nyloc House 254-DZ, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli-400018 Mumbai (Maharashtra).
6. Mr.Vijay, Concerned Officer of Provident Funds, Zodiac Clothing Co. Ltd., Head Office, Nyloc House 254-D2, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli-400018 Mumbai (Maharashtra).

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Devinder Kumar, Advocate for Complainant (through VC) and complainant in person.
	:	Sh.Gaurav Tangri, Advocate for OP No.1 to 4.
	:	OP No.5 & 6 ex-parte.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      Averments are that the complainant being a consumer joined Zodiac Clothing Co. Ltd., OP No.3 in May 2008 as a Branch Manager in the Co. office at Chandigarh. He served the organization for the period from 26.05.20008 to 02.11.2011 (Annexure C-1). Thereafter, the complainant completed the required formalities by submitting the composite claim form No.19 & form 15-G for withdrawal and final settlement of the provident fund amount to be credited to his account, the details of which were duly filled in and furnished to the satisfaction of OPs in December 2020 (Annexure C-7 & C-8). The complainant further wrote numerous mails and registered letter to the concerned department of OPs requesting therein to release the Employee Provident Fund under EPF (Annexure C-11) collectively. Despite repeated requests, communications through emails, registered letters and grievance redressal online requests the OPs did not give any heed to legitimate claim of the complainant. A legal notice Annexure C-13 was also sent to the OPs, but it was of no avail. Hence, is the present consumer complaint.
2.     OP No.1 to 4 contested the consumer complaint, filed their written reply and stated that the Central Board of Trustees being the corporate body and the ultimate authority under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, is the only legal entity that can sue and be sued as per Section 5-C of the Act. Since, the Central Board of Trustees, being a necessary party, has not been impleaded in the present complaint. On merits, the EPF Department, vide letter dated 21.12.2023 had requested the establishment, M/s Zodiac Clothing Co. Ltd., to forward the documents of the member, i.e., the complainant, for updating the date of joining and the date of leaving and called upon the establishment to create an UAN for the complainant (Annexure R-1/1/). It is further alleged that the claims are settled on the basis of the requisite and full information of the member updated in the system, i.e., date of joining, date of leaving, bank KYC, and Aadhar number linked with UAN. Instead of getting details updated, the complainant is levelling false allegations against the answering OP without any basis. On these lines, the case is sought to be defended by OP No.1 to 4.
3.     Notice of the complaint was sent to OP No.5 & 6 seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of OP No.5 & 6 despite following proper procedure, therefore they were proceeded ex-parte on 01.02.2024.
4.     Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
5.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
6.     We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone through the record of the case.
7.     The main grievance of the complainant is that inspite of submission of all the documents to the OP’s, his dues towards EPF, were not paid by the OPs.
8.     On perusal of documents, it is observed that complainant had submitted the claim form & documents (Annexure C-7), to the OP No.5 & 6 on 03.12.2020 and the same was countersigned & forwarded by the OP No.5 & 6 to OP No.1 & 4 on 23.12.2020. It is observed from the claim form (Annexure C-7), that the detail of UAN, were not filled by the employers i.e., OP No.5 & 6 due to which the OP No.1 to 4 could not process the claim form of the complainant.
9.     We have also perused the Annexure R-1/1 of OP No.1 to 4, which is a letter addressed to the OP No.5 & 6, for furnishing certain documents and advised them to generate the UAN of the complainant & intimate to them and submit the online claim on the portal of OP No.1 to 4 to enable them to settle the claim. It is observed that OP No.5 & 6 have not processed the claim properly online & also failed to generate UAN of the complainant PF Account for early settlement of the claim of the complainant.
10.     Significantly, OP No.5 & 6 did not contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the OP No.5 & 6 draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of the OP No.5 & 6 shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.
11.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that delay was caused by OP No.5 & 6 due to non-processing of claim form of complainant properly and they are deficient in providing service and have indulged in unfair trade practice.
12.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed.

1. OP No.5 & 6 are directed to pay a lumpsum compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant & forward the claim online & after generation of UAN to the OP No.1 to 4.
2.  The OP No.1 to 4 are directed to process the claim & release the proceeds after receipt of information from OP No.5 & 6, if the claim proceeds have not been paid to the complainant earlier.

13.     This order be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amount mentioned at Sr.No.(i) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above.
14.     Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.
15.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			Sd/-
11/06/2024			[Pawanjit Singh]
Ls			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur]
			Member
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
			Member