Sri. Jacob Stephen (President):<br /> <br /> The complainant filed this complaint against the opposite parties for a relief from the Forum.<br /> <br /> 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: The complainant was a Lecturer of St.Thomas College, Kozhencherry from 12.6.1968 to 31.5.2000. The complainant was a subscriber of Kerala University Provident Fund (KUPF) and his contributions were credited to KUPF A/c. No.3572 upto 31.12.1975. With the introduction of Direct Payment System, his provident fund contributions in KUPF were transferred to Kerala Private College Staff Provident Fund (KPCSPF) by the university and the provident fund contributions stands in the credit of the complainant upto 31.12.1975 were credited in his KPCSPF A/c. No.7486 upto February 2000. Later it was learnt that his subscription upto 31.12.1975 in the Kerala University Provident Fund Account was not transferred to Kerala Private College Staff Provident Fund Account No.7486. The above matter was intimated to the 3rd opposite party, Kerala University, Thiruvananthapuram on 13.7.1985 and also to first opposite party, Director of Collegiate Education on 22.7.1989 and on 16.11.1999. But there was no response from first and third opposite parties.<br /> <br /> 3. In the month of March, 2000, i.e. about 2 months before the complainant’s retirement, he submitted an application for the closure of his P.F. account in which he had also pointed out the non transfer of the P.F. contribution from KUPF account to KPCSPF account. However, the third opposite party settled the P.F. account by paying only Rs.2,76,960/-.<br /> <br /> 4. According to the complainant, the above amount was not inclusive of his P.F. contributions upto 31.12.1975. The contributions upto 31.12.1975 i.e. an amount of Rs.2,630-55 has been left out while the settlement of his P.F. Account. The complainant is entitled to get an amount of Rs.3,19,774/- whereas he received only Rs.2,76,960/-. The difference is Rs.42,814/-. This was due to deficiency of service of the opposite parties. Therefore, the complainant filed this O.P. for the realisation of Rs.42,814/- with interest, compensation and cost from the opposite parties.<br /> <br /> 5. All the opposite parties filed separate versions. The 1st opposite party’s version is that, no amount is left out during the final settlement. The entire amount to the credit of the complainant was given on final settlement. There is no lapse on their part. They also alleged that complainant’s calculation is not correct. They calculated the interest as per P.F rules. They also alleged that he has not put forth any complainant to them after receiving settled amount of Rs. 2,76,960/-. Therefore the complaint lacks merit and is to be dismissed with their cost.<br /> <br /> 6. The 2nd opposite party filed version admitting the complainant’s case. They stated that P.F contribution were credited to the 3rd opposite party’s Provident Fund (KUPF)A/c.No.3572 up to 31.12.1975. They also stated that complainant was on leave on deputation from 1.1.1976 to 31.12.1980, but he rejoined duty on 1.8.1980. He was admitted to KPCSPF on 8/81 with A/c.No.7486 on completion of one year of service after rejoining duty and subscription towards KPCSPF was started from 10/83. The entire amount collected has been transferred and credited to the KUPF A/c and later to KPCSPF. They also stated that complainant’s representation with regard to this matter has been forwarded to 1st opposite party.<br /> <br /> 7. There was no laches on their part as the entire amount collected has been credited to the Provident Fund Account in time.<br /> <br /> 8. The 3rd opposite party filed version stating that complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. They admit that complainant was a subscriber to Kerala University Provident Fund of teachers of private colleges. But they had ceased to be the administrator of the private college teachers’ provident fund with effect from 31.3.1976 consequent to the implementation of direct payment system. The accounts of the teachers’ provident fund up to that date was closed and transferred to the 1st opposite party. The individual balance of each teacher in every college as on 31.3.1976 was also forwarded to the 1st opposite party. There is no record regarding teachers’ provident fund except the statements of apportionment of closing balance in individual accounts as on 31.3.1976 relating to all private colleges. The closing balance of the complainant’s A/c.No.3572, whose name is entered as serial No.39 as per the statement is Rs.2,630.55. No letter from the complainant was received to them on 13.7.1985 as claimed by the complaint. They are no way related or responsible for the claim of the complainant as they have done their duty promptly, and their is no deficiency of service from their part and the complaint is to be dismissed with their cost.<br /> <br /> 9. The 4th opposite party also filed version admitting that complainant’s amount of subscription standing in Kerala University Provident Fund was transfer credited to the KPCSPF A/c.No.7486 in the name of the complainant. His application for closure of P.F account received on 16.6.2000. On getting the closure application, it was settled by paying Rs.2,76,960/-. Therefore the complaint lacks merit and there is no lack on their part and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 10. On 2.4.2007 the 1st opposite party filed a letter/statement before the Forum stating that on subsequent verification of the records an amount of Rs.2,630.55 was left out from the calculation while settling the P.F account of the complainant and the said amount was seen credited during 1/91 and that amount and its interests amounting to Rs.10,161/- was given to the complainant.<br /> <br /> 11. The points for consideration of this O.P are the following:-<br /> (1)Whether this O.P is maintainable before the Forum?<br /> <br /> (2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get a relief as prayed for<br /> in the complaint?<br /> (3) Relief & Costs?<br /> <br /> 12. The evidence of this O.P consists of the oral evidence of the complainant who was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A6 marked for the complaint on the basis of the proof affidavit filed by the complainant. Ext.A1 is the letter of 1st opposite party to the complainant-dated 22.3.01. Ext.A2 is the order of 4th opposite party dated 16.5.01. Ext.A3 is the copy of the statement of Provident Fund Account of the complainant and others up to 31.3.1976. Ext.A4 is the copy of statement showing the balance of P.F of the complainant during 1983-84. Ext.A5 is the copy of the statement of account of complainant’s KPCSPF A/c.No.7486. Ext.A6 is the copy of statement of account of complainant from March 1993 to February 2000 prepared by 2nd opposite party.<br /> <br /> 13. The opposite parties 1, 3 and 4 has not produced any evidence to prove their contention or cross-examined the complainant. Even though 1st opposite party denied the complainant’s claim, later they have admitted that an amount of Rs.2,631/- has left out while calculating complainant’s P.F account during settlement of the account. The said amount was seen credited during 1/91 and later that amount with interest amounting Rs.10,161/- was given to the complainant.<br /> <br /> 14. It is pertinent to note that initially P.F contribution had credited to the KUPF account No.3572 up to 31.12.1975. With the introduction of Direct Payment System, complainant’s P.F contribution had transferred to KPCSPF. As per Ext.A3 an amount of Rs.2,630.55 was seen credited to his KUPF A/c.No.3572 up to 31.3.1976. But in Ext.A4, the balance is only Rs.1,408/- during 1983-84. Therefore, it is clear that certain amount has been missed from the P.F account of the complainant.<br /> <br /> 15. However, as per the 1st opposite party’s subsequent statement, dated 2.4.2003 an amount of Rs.2,630/- was seen credited to KPCSPF account during 1/91. This shows that the complainant’s contribution to KUPF up to 1976 was not transferred to KPCSPF in time as claimed by the 3rd opposite party. Moreover, the 3rd opposite party failed to prove their contention that they have transferred the said amount to KPCSPF during 1976 itself. In the circumstances, we find deficiency of service from the part of 3rd opposite party in transferring the P.F subscription stands in the credit of the complainant in KUPF account. Because of the said deficiency of 3rd opposite party, the complainant caused monetary loss and it was due to the sole reason of not transferring the subscription of the complainant to KPCSPF in time. So the 3rd opposite party is liable to compensate the loss caused to the complainant. The complainant had already received the missed amount and its interest from 1/91. But he had lost interest for the missed amount of Rs.2630.55 from 1976 onwards till his retirement and he is entitled to get it from the 3rd opposite party. The complainant claims an amount of Rs.42,814/- as his balance P.F. being the balance of the amount he had already received on final settlement (i.e. total amount he claimed is Rs.3,19,774/-. The amount he had received on final settlement is Rs.2,76,960/-. The difference of this amounts is Rs.42,814/-). But we are not in a position to work out the actual amount entitled for the complainant in the absence of any material, before the Forum showing the rate of interest of P.F. account etc. So it has to be calculated. Since the third opposite party is liable to pay the P.F. balance to the complainant, they are the proper party to calculate the amount entitled for the complainant. So the 3rd opposite party is hereby directed to calculate the total amount of interest entitled to the complainant as per the rates prevailed and applicable to P.F from 1976 onwards till his retirement. Considering the nature of the deficiency of 3rd opposite party, the complaint is also entitled to get reasonable compensation and cost for his mental agony and sufferings, from the 3rd opposite party, which is limited to Rs.5,000/- and Rs.2,000/- respectively. There is no deficiency from the part of opposite parties 1, 2 and 4.<br /> <br /> 16. In the result, this O.P is allowed with modification, thereby the complainant is allowed to realise the total amount of interest only for the missed credit of Rs.2,630.55 rounded to Rs.2,631/- (Rupees Two thousand six hundred and thirty one only) from 1.1.1976 to 31.5.2000, calculated by the 3rd opposite party in accordance with the rate of interest applicable to P.F for Private College Teachers’ and as per P.F rules applicable to them with interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the said amount from the date of this O.P till this date, and thereafter at 6% interest per annum till realization from the 3rd opposite party together with compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) and cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only). The 3rd opposite party is directed to pay the amount so awarded in favour of the complainant within 2 months from the date of receipt of this order failing which interest for the whole amount will follow at 9% per annum till the whole payment. <br /> <br /> <br /> Declared in the Open Forum on this the 20th day of May, 2008.<br /> <br /> Jacob Stephen,<br /> President<br /> Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) :<br /> Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) :<br /> Appendix:<br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant:<br /> PW1 : T.M. Thomas.<br /> Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:<br /> A1 : Photocopy of the letter dated 22.3.2001 issued to the complainant by the<br /> first opposite party.<br /> A2 : Photocopy of the letter dated 16.5.2001 issued to the complainant by the<br /> Principal Secretary (Finance), Thiruvananthapuram.<br /> A3 : Copy of Provident Fund Account of Teachers of St.Thomas College,<br /> Kozhencherry for the year ended 31.3.1976.<br /> A4 : Opening balance statement of account from 1983 to 1984.<br /> A5 : Photocopy of the statement of accounts of Sri. T.M. Thomas as per credit<br /> card from 2/93 upto 2/99.<br /> A6 : Statement of account of Provident Fund from March 1993 to February,2000.<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil.<br /> Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil.<br /> <br /> <br />