Sikander Singh S/o Sh. Bhan Singh, #1076, B-IV, Guru Teg Bahadur Colony, Malerkotla, District Sangrur, Punjab.

 ….…Complainant

V E R S U S

[1]        The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, O/o Employees Provident Fund Organization, SCO No.4-7, Sec.17, Chandigarh.

[2]        The Managing Director, Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation, SCO No. 80-86, Sector 34, Chandigarh.

.…..Opposite Parties

 BEFORE:    JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER, PRESIDENT

                        MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER

Present:       Sh. M.G. Sharma, duly authorized representative of the appellant.

                   Ms. Geeta Sharma, Adv. for respondent No.1

                   Ms. Deepali Puri, Adv. for respondent No.2

MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER

            This is an appeal filed by the appellant/complainant against the order, dated 16.6.2011 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as District Forum only) in complaint case No. 216 of 2010 vide which, it dismissed the complaint.

2.                  Briefly stated, the case of the complainant was that the OPs had   unlawfully fixed his monthly pension at Rs.898/- p.m. only instead of Rs.1558/- p.m. It was stated that OP No.2 under the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court had paid the total salary of the Complainant from 16.6.86 to 24.12.2001, but had deliberately neither deducted nor contributed the share of the complainant at the time of payment of salary from 16.6.86 to 24.12.2001 as per the provisions of the Provident Fund Act, 1952.  It was further stated that non-deduction and non-contribution of PF share of the Complainant @ Rs.12%, and further failing to bifurcate the share of contribution, in two parts @ Rs.8.33% towards EPS-1995, and the remaining @ Rs.3.67%, into the provident fund, had caused immense mental agony & hardship to the Complainant. It was further stated that the Complainant even requested the OPs to credit his share of the provident fund in his PF account, and the remaining part be accordingly deposited/ contributed with the  EPF, to facilitate revision in PPO No. PB/BTI/4902 for increase in his monthly pension, but all his efforts failed to fructify. Accordingly, a complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only), alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs, amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice was filed.

3.                  Reply was filed by OP-1, wherein, it was stated that the amount of Rs.1,86,938/- (PF Rs.1,39,635/- & Pension Rs.47,303/-) as Provident Fund and Pension Contribution, respectively was deposited by OP No.2 on 28.4.2010 in the EFP account with the State Bank of India. The information of the same was given by OP No.2 in the month of May, 2010 to OP No.1, who, immediately, processed the pension case of the Complainant and issued revised Input Data Sheet and forwarded the same to the RPFC, Bathinda, for issuing the revised PPO. It was further stated that the RPFC, Bathinda, immediately, without any delay issued revised Pension Payment Order on 23.6.2010, along with arrears. All other allegations, levelled by the complainant, in the complaint, were denied. It was further stated that there was no deficiency, in service, on the part of OP-1 nor he indulged into unfair trade practice.

4.                  OP No.2 in the reply stated that the salary of the Complainant was paid under the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court, but it was denied that the PF had not been deducted or contributed. However, on the advice of OP No.1 dated 23.4.2010, a sum of Rs.1,89,572/- was deposited on 28.4.2010, and it was credited to the account of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. All other material allegations of the complaint, were denied. It was further stated that there was no deficiency, in service, on his part.

5.                  The parties led evidence, in support of their case.

6.                  The learned District Forum, dismissed the complaint, in the manner, referred to, in the opening para of this order.  

7.                  Aggrieved by the order, passed by the learned District Forum, the appellant/complainant, has filed the instant appeal. 

8.                  We have heard Counsel for the parties, and have perused the record, carefully.

9.                  It is admitted that on 13.07.2009, in pursuance of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,  the appellant/complainant was reinstated and paid the salary and the conquential benefits from 16.6.86 to 24.12.2001.  Subsequently OP-2 (i.e. the employer) deposited his share to the tune of Rs.1,86,938/- (Provident Fund Rs.1,39,635/- and pension contribution Rs.47,303/-)  in the EFP account, with the SBI, regarding which information was given to OP-1 in May, 2010 who immediately processed the pension case of the complainant and issued revised Input Data Sheet and forwarded the same to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bathinda for issuing the revised PPO. The revised pension payment order was issued and the revised pension alongwith the arrears was paid to the complainnt on 23.6.2010.  At the time of making payment of arrears of salary and consequential benefits of Rs.19,38,674/- on 24.12.2001, the share of  PF of the complainant was not deducted by OP No.2, being his employer. It was the legal duty of OP No.2 to deduct the PF share of the complainant at the time of disbursing the salary and consequential benefits to him.  Since OP No.2 failed to deduct and contribute the share of PF of the complainant, at the relevant time, and contribute the same to his PF account, it resulted into fixation of his (complainant) pension wrongly vide PPO
Annexure R-1. This act of OP No.2 amounted to deficiency in rendering service..  In our opinion, in order to correct his mistake, OP No.2 is required to demand and collect the amount of share of contribution of the complainant towards PF, deposit the same into his PF account and recalculate his pension after taking into consideration the share of contribution of the employer and the employee.

10.                         However, there is no deficiency, in rendering service, on the part of OP No.1 and, therefore, the complaint qua it is liable to be dismissed.

11.                         For the reasons recorded above, the appeal filed by the appellant/complainant is accepted qua OP-2 with costs,  the order of the District Forum, is set aside in the manner indicated above and OP No.2 is directed as under;

i)                   to demand PF contribution of the share of the complainant from him, and deposit the same into his Provident Fund Account alongwith his share (if already not deposited) and thereafter recalculate/revise his pension and disburse it to him from the date of his superannuation,  provided that he (complainant) deposits the requisite amount as per demand of OP No.2.

ii)                 to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation, for mental agony and physical harassment caused to the complainant for fixing his pension at a lower rate.. 

iii)               to pay Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses.

                              OP-2 shall comply direction (i) indicated above within 30 days from the date of receipt of requisite contribution of the complainant.  OP No.2 shall comply with directions (ii) and (iii) indicated above within 30 days, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order, failing which it shall be liable to pay penal interest @12%, on the awarded compensation indicated above w.e.f. 6.4.2010 i.e. the date of filing of the complaint, besides costs, till realization.  

                  12.                   The complaint against OP No.1 is dismissed, with no order as to costs.

13.               Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.

Pronounced.                                                                         

2^nd January, 2012.                                                       sd/-                                                                                         [JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER]

                                                                                            PRESIDENT           

                                                                                                sd/-                                                                                                    [NEENA SANDHU]

                                                                                                                          MEMBER