SRI R.S.NAYAK, MEMBER …                    The gist of case is that, the complainant was working as a NMR Mulia under OP.1 since 21.2.1982 and received VSS from 31.12.1999. During his service tenure he was allotted with EPF A/c no. OR/2955/418 vides office order no.5358 dt.27.06.1991 of OP.1. as per EPF act he is eligible to deposit EPF & FPF amount from 21.02.1982 to 16.6.86 and 29.7.90 to 31.1.91 so he contends that after persuasions the OP.1 had sent his deposited EPF & FPF amount calculating from 7/90 to 31.12.1999 but till yet not deposited the EPF & FPF amount from 21.2.82 to 16.6.1986. From sources he came to know that the OP.1 had deposited EPF/FPF amount for 146 of co-employees from 12/1981 to 3/1991 vide EPF code no.OR/2955 but has not deposited his EPF amount from 21.2.82 to 16.6.86. Due to non deposit of the above said EPF/FPF dues for the period 21.2.82 to 16.6.86 the OP.4 has not sanction his EPF pension till yet. So he contends that he has submitted several persuasions to the OP.s but for no result, hence there is deficiency in service on the part of OP.s. Hence he contends that, due to non issuance of EPF amount he inflicted mental and financial losses, so prayed to allow the entire claims along with a sum of Rs.70,000/- as compensation and cost.

2.         The OP.no.1 has filed his written counter and averred that the case is not maintainable. The forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the same as it is not coming under its ambit. The case also attracts the Sec.24A of C.P.Act and no cause of action has been made well within limitation period. He further contends that the complainant was working under the then Water Resources Department for the claim period. Further he contends nothing except evasive denials with a prayer to dismiss the complaint.

3.         The OP.2 has filed a petition and stated that, he is just a helper for presenting/submitting any type of correspondences files relating to NMR work charge establishment to the E.E. through his senior. Hence he is no way related with the case, so prayed to delete his name in the ends of justice.

4.         The OP.3 has filed his counter and stated that, the present complainant was never an employee under his office. He contends that the RTI application wherein he seeks information and as he was not employee of this OP, he transmits the same to the OP.1, and the OP.1 answered/intimated the same to the complainant vide letter no.1083 dt.04.07.2017. Hence the OP.3 prayed to dismiss the case.

5.         The counsel for OP.4 has filed his counter to contends that, the EPF amount of Rs.19817/- and EPS amount of Rs.5692/- has been partly settled on 02.02.2001 and the residual EPF amount of Rs.7962/- was finally settled on 29.10.2014. He further contends that for non extension of EPF and allied benefits to the complainant a show cause notice has been issued to the establishment i.e. OP.1. He also assured that on receipt of EPF and allied dues and relevant returns in respect of complainant immediate action will be taken towards settlement of EPF and allied dues. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of this OP., hence prayed to dismiss the case.

6.         The complainant has filed copy of some documents. The OP.s filed nothing except counters. Case heard from them and submissions considered. 

7.         It reveals from the record and submissions that the complainant has prior to file the present complaint has already been received a sum of Rs.19817/- as EPF amount and Rs.5692/- as EPS dues and residual EPF amount of Rs.7962/- was finally received on 02.02.2014, but yet to get the extension PF benefits from 21.02.1982 to 16.06.1986.

8.         It is seen from the counter of OP.1 that the complainant was not working under his establishment for the period from 21.02.1982 to 16.06.1986 and the Water resources Department was the employer of the complainant for the then period, hence he averred no latches on his part to fulfill the claim of complainant. But here in the case he failed to prove that how and on whom persuasions the complainant got the part payments earlier from OP.4. The OP.4 contends in his counter that he has pursued a show cause notice to the OP.1 for the extension PF dues for the lapsed period.

9.         So far plea urged on behalf of both the parties, we viewed that, the complainant has took retirement in 1999, where as there are provisions in the statute in para 72 of the Act, the duties of the employer is mandated, in 73 the duties of the EPF Commissioner is also mandated. While records of the members contribution is required to be maintained up to date, and be intimated to the subscribing member neither of the OP.no.1 & 4 have found adhered to the mandates, despite depositing EPF/FPF amount of 146 NMR coworkers from 12/1981 to 3/1991 they failed to deposit the subscriptions of complainant, which seems nothing but capriciously, detrimental to the interest & results of the present complainant. We do not agree with version of the OP.1 that the complainant filed the present complaint not within the stipulated time and is hit by Sec.24 of C.P.Act, which in our concerned view is nothing but a vogue plea, so outrightly quashed. It res ipsa loquittur proves the negligence, arbitrariness and ultimately proves deficiency in service on the part of the OP.s.

10.       Now, we are equally convinced that, the OP.1 & 4 have failed to discharge their duties, relieving the complainant of his hurdles to get his legitimate dues. The OP.1 fails to deposits the PF subscriptions, negligently, which he should have done immediate on disbursement of the contribution, the OP.4 herein above never cared to exercise his statutory powers to enforce on the OP.1 as such.

            Hence, the complaint against the OP.1 & 4 is allowed on contest with costs.

ORDER

i)          The OP.1 is here by directed to prepare the required forms/papers of the present complainant, and submit it to the OP.4 within 30 days of receipt of this order. He may specially depute staffs for the purpose.

ii)         The OP.4 within 15 days hence receipt of the prescribed forms of EPF rules, from the OP.1, within 15 days shall endeavor to settle the claim/pensions of the complainant, with due interest accruable calculated on the unpaid extension PF dues from 21.02.1982 to 16.06.1986.

iii)        Besides, the OP.1 & 4 are hereby directed to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/-(Five thousand) each to the complainant, which includes the cost of litigation.

            Pronounced in the open forum today the 28th day of May’2018.

              Sd/-                                                                                    Sd/-

           MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT,DCDRF,

                                                                                           NABARANGPUR