DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

North 24 Pgs., BARASAT

C.C. No./303/2022

Date of Filing                                   Date of Admission               Date of Disposal

  22.09.2022                                                  26.09.2022                                    26.04.2024

P R E S E N T                                     :- Sri. Daman Prosad Biswas……….President.

                                                :- Sri.  Abhijit Basu…………………. Member.

JUDGMENT /FINAL ORDER

            Complainant above named filed this complaint against the aforesaid opposite parties praying for payment of arrear pension for the period from 20.06.2016 to 30.11.2021, interest at the rate of 10% p.a , compensation amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- and other reliefs.

            He alleged that he is a senior citizen now aged about 72 years. He render service for 37 years before the Indian Audit and Accounts Department as Senior Audit Officer. He was granted all kinds of Post Retirement Benefits from his Parent Department initially his pension was fixed to Rs. 16,890/-. Subsequently it was enhanced to Rs. 36,030/- lastly his pension was enhanced to Rs. 46,900/-. He was getting pension and other allowances from the O.P- Bank. His pension was enhanced to Rs. 46,900/- with effect from March, 2021 as per order communicating by the FA & CAO/Pension/E Rly/Kolkata issued vide his letter dated 03.02.2021 and said enhancement was made with effect from 20.06.2016. But the O.P. Bank failed to implement the said order. The complainant was entitled to arrear pension from 20.06.2016 to 30.11.2021 but O.P bank did not pay the same in his favour. Hence the complainant filed this case.

            Summon served upon the O.Ps but O.P did not turn up nor filed W.V.

                                                            Decision with Reasons

            Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief and also filed certain document in support of his case. O.Ps not contesting the case. So the aforesaid affidavit-in-chief filed by the complainant is nothing but unchallenged testimony and we do not find any reason to disbelieve the same. Placing reliance upon the said affidavit-in-chief it is clear before us that complainant is entitled to arrear amount of pension for the period from 20.06.2016 to 30.11.2021.  It is the allegation of the complainant that in spite of several requests O.P-Bank not yet paid the same.

            During hearing of argument complainant filed affidavit-BNA. On perusal of the said document we find that complainant stated in para 15 of  BNA that as soon as the O.P received the notice, they hurriedly credited an amount of Rs. 2,34,677/- to the pension account of the complainant and requested the complainant to withdraw the case.

            So, it is clear before us that during pendency of this case O.P paid the arrear amount of pension for the period from 20.06.2016 to 30.11.2021.

                                                                                                                                                                   Contd/-2

C.C. No./303/2022

:: 2 ::

            So it is clear before us that complainant got the arrear amount of pension from the O.P-Bank. On perusal of record we find that aforesaid enhancement of pension order was issued on 03.02.2021 but O.P. Bank not yet paid the aforesaid arrear account from pension for that receive the complainant last this case on 24.09.22 and after receive of the notice O.P. Bank paid the said amount on 30.09.2022. So, it is clear before us that O.P- Bank paid the aforesaid amount after one year seven month and for that reason complainant several interest of the said amount. Moreover, we also find that O.P- Bank willfully and whimsically neglected to pay the arrear amount of pension in favour of the complainant and such type of act are nothing but deficiency in service.

            On careful perusal of record and careful perusal of aforesaid complaint we find that complainant is the consumer and O.P is the service provider.

            Having regard to the aforesaid discussion we are of the view that complainant has able to established his grievance by sufficient document beyond reason ground he is entitled to relief as per his prayer.

Hence,

                    it is ordered,

            that the present case be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P with cost of Rs. 5,000/-to be paid by the  O.P in favour of the complainant.

            As the O. P paid the arrear pension during pendency of this case no order is passed to that effect.

            O.P is directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs. 35,000/- in favour of the complainant positively within 45 days from this day failing which complainant shall have liberty to put this order into execution.

                 Let a copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.

Dictated and Corrected by me

President

Member                                                                                                        President