Orissa

Debagarh

CC/27/2019

Sudarshan Dash, Retd. Headmaster, Aged about 76 years, S/o-Late Mukunda Dash - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Asst. General Manager, State Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

14 Oct 2019

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DEOGARH

C.C NO-27/2019

Present-        Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Jayanti Pradhan, Member (W) and Smt. Arati Das, Member.

 

Sudarshan Dash,Retd. Headmaster, Aged about 76 years,

S/O- Late Mukunda Dash,

At-Navodayasahi,P.O/P.s/Dist-Deogarh.                            …..Complainant

Vrs.

1. The Asst. General Manager,

          State Bank of India,

          CPPC 161/162 C&D Building,

          Near Bomikhal(Cuttack Puri Road),

           Bhubaneswar. 

2. The Chief Manager,

          State Bank of India,

          At/Po/Dist-Deogarh.

 

For the Complainant:-Nemo

For the O.P-1:-Sri S.K Ratha, Advocate, Deogarh.

For the O.P-2:-Sri S.K Ratha, Advocate, Deogarh.

     

DATE OF HEARING: 24.09.2019, DATE OF ORDER: 14.10.2019.

Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President- Brief facts of the case is that, the Complainant is the elder brother of the deceased pensioner who was a child widow died on dtd. 29.10.2016 leaving behind no legal heir. After her death the Complainant has performed all the funeral rites of the pensioner for which he availed some personal loans. Afterwards the Complainant is declared as the legal heir of the deceased. In the meantime the Govt. has introduced 7^th pay commission w.e.f dtd. 01.01.2016 for the interest of the public servants and the pensioners. But due to wrong calculation made by the bank authority this benefit is not made available to the deceased pensioner. The matter was brought to the notice of the O.P-1 and O.P-2 but in vain. Hence the Complainant became aggrieved by this harassment, ultimately decided to seek relief from this Forum. But according to the O.Ps though the deceased pensioner was being paid pension through O.P-2 till her death, the incident of death of the pensioner was informed to the O.Ps in delay so the O.P-1 continued to pay pension to her account. The surplus amount of pension was reversed to the Govt.  Account through treasury challan as soon as the information of death was intimated by the Complainant. The O.Ps has already started the process for payment of arrear according to the 7^th pay commission but due to various workloads it is skipped by the O.Ps which is a bonafide mistake. But the O.Ps has credited an amount of Rs 6,450/- to the account of the deceased pensioner on dtd. 17.07.2019 and closed the said account and transferred the entire amount to the account of the complainant on dtd. 19.08.2019.

 

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act.1986?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?

From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant is a consumer as he is the legal heir of the deceased consumer. The O.Ps taken the plea of involvement of multiple branches in the process of payment of arrear pension and this particular case somehow skipped during mass processing due to misfortune is completely erroneous. It is only stated to escape from liabilities. The concerned Bank unit may have voluminous work but not at the cost of the esteemed customer which the Complainant faced. Lakhs of pensioners’ case in this state are being dealt by O.Ps in this regard and in most cases the pensioners gets the relives. But the Complainant here is a victim of the latches of the O.Ps. In spite of several efforts made by the Complainant the O.Ps did not turn out. But the O.Ps has paid the arrears only after filling of this consumer case and receipt of notice for appearances before this Forum without any interest on the held up amount. Again the pension is being paid through O.P-2, he has no role in sanctioning/grant of pension to the pensioners. It the O.P-1 who has ignored as well as neglected the complainant to provide necessary services which he deserves. Hence the O.P-1 has committed Deficiency in Service U/S- 2(1)(o) of Consumer Protection Act-1986 and we order as under :-

 

                                                                           ORDER

The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P-1 is directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the arrear pension amount of Rs.6,450/- (Rupees Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty) to the Complainant for the period it was held unpaid, till the date of actual payment. Again the O.P-1 is directed to pay Rs. 500/-(Rupees Five Hundred) for litigation expenses to the Complainant. All the above direction are to be complied within 30 (Thirty) days from receipt of this order, failing which, the Complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law.

Office is directed to supply the free copies of the order to the parties receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e. 14^th day of October, 2019 under my hand and seal of this forum.

 

             I      agree,                                       I     agree,

           

          MEMBER(W).                                 MEMBER.                           PRESIDENT.

          Dictated and Corrected

              by me.

 

       PRESIDENT.