Heard learned counsel for appellant. None appears for the respondent.
2. This appeal is filed u/s 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). Parties to these appeals shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.
3. The case of the complainant in nutshell is that the complainant was working asS.S.Teacher on contractual basis and as such became EPF Member for the period from 1.8.2008 to 28.2.2014 till she is regularized in her post. It is alleged inter alia that the complainant paid the subscription being deducted by the employer regularly every month. It is alleged that complainant after regularization in her post applied for withdrawal of EPF amount admissible to her but it was not settled by OPs.. So complaint was filed against OP Nos. 1 and 2.
4. OP No. 1 filed written version stating therein that they have not received any claim from the complainant in Form No. 19 and 10c. Therefore, it was not settled. So, they have no deficiency in service.
5. OP No. 2 filed written version stating therein that they were deducting the contribution under the scheme in every month but after regularization shemade exit from the scheme. OP No.2 after filling up Form No.19 and 10c sent same to OP No.1. So, they have no deficiency in service.
6. Learned District Forum after hearingboth the parties passed the following order:-
“xxxxxxxxx
The OP No.1 is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand) only towards compensation and Rs.1,000/- (One thousand) towards cost to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount shall carry an interest @8% p.a. till payment.”
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned District Forum without considering the materials on record properly passed the impugned order which is illegal. According to him in the impugned order learned District Forum has observed that OP No.1 has settled the claim but imposed fine which is irregular and illegal. Therefore, he submitted to set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.
8. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellantand perused the impugned order including the DFR.
9. No doubt the complainant was a contractual teacher for the aforesaid period and has not paid the amount as available under the EPF Scheme but the DFR clearly shows that the amount has already been paid up to date. In this regard an affidavit has been filed by the concerned Officer of OP No.1 with document to state that on 20.1.2017 they got the application format and paid the amount on 9.2.2017. Unless the application received on time, it is not possible to pay the amount. When application has been received and payment has been made the impugned order is not correct. Hence, it is set aside and appeal stands allowed. No cost.
The statutory amount deposited be refunded to the appellant with interest accrued thereon if any on proper identification.
DFR be sent back forthwith.
Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.
