BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.SundaraRamaiah, B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri.M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Tuesday the 17th day of May, 2011
CC.No 146/2010
BETWEEN:
V.Satyanarayana, S/o. V.L.P.Lakshmanna, Retired Employee,
R/o. H.No.5/13/1, Chippagiri (V) and (M), Kurnool.
…Complainant
-Vs-
1. The President, Holagunda PACS,
D.No.10/28, Holagunda (V) and (M) - 518 346, Kurnool District.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Door No.10/28 Sriram Nagar,Holagunda PACS, Holagunda (V) and (M)-518346,Kurnool District.
3. The District Co-Operative Central Bank, By its General Manager, D.No.46-1-C, Near Collectorate, Kurnool-518001
. …Opposite Parties
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri P.V.RamanaReddy, Advocate for complainant and Sri K.Sreedhar, Advocate for opposite parties 1 & 2, Sri K.Rama Krishna Rao, Advocate for opposite party No.3 for upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri.T.SundaraRamaiah, President)
CC. No. 146/2010
- This complaint is filed under section 13 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-
(a) To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,42,000/- towardsretirement benefits;
(b) To pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental agony and hardship;
- To pay costs of the complaint in a sum of Rs.5,000/-;
- Interest at the rate of 24% P.A. from the date of retirement, on gratuity amount, surrender leave;
And
(e) To pass such other relief as the Hon’ble Forum may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under:-The complainant worked as secretary of Primary Agricultural Society from 1973 to 30-04-2008. The complainant retired from service on 30-04-2008. After his retirementthe complainant called upon his employer to pay retirement benefits of Rs.1,42,000/-. He also addressed a letter to the President of Society on 17-04-2008. President of opposite party No.1 also addressed letters to the District Co-operative Officer and opposite party No.3 requesting information. The District Co-operative Officer sent a reply directing the opposite party No.1 to discuss the matter in board meeting and to pay the retirement benefits in accordance with service bye-laws with reference to audit report. The complainant also got issued legal notice to opposite parties 1 and 2 on 23-11-2009. Opposite parties 1 and 2 jointly gave a reply notice with false allegations. The complainant handed over all the assets and records to the incumbents of the respective societies on the respective dates. The complainant has not misappropriated funds of the society. The complainant being a retired employee is entitled to receive the retirement benefits. There is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant suffered mental agony. Hence the complaint.
3. Opposite parties 1 and 2 filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable. When the complainant was working as a secretary ofHonnurkottla PACS from 1991 to 2005 he misappropriated the society funds. The same is mentioned in audit report. The complainant was informed about the misappropriation of society funds. The complainant did not repay the same. While working as Chief Executive Officer of Holagunda PACS, the complainant misappropriated the assets of society. The complainant has drawn an amount of Rs.33,802/- fromHonnurkottla PACS on 15-10-2001 by surrendering earned leave. Again the complainant is claiming the amount. The complainant has to repay the surrender leave amount with interest. The complainant has drawn provident fund amount of Rs.64,851/- on 27-06-1998 at Honnurkottla PACS. There is no provision to withdraw provident fund amount during service. The holders of provident fund can avail loan facilities. The complainant has repay the provident fund amount drawn by him with interest. The complainant misappropriated society funds to a tune of Rs.9,33,366/-. The complainant filed the present complaint with malafied intention. The complainant filed a case in M.P.No.32/2008 on the file of labour court, Anantapur for the same reliefs. The said case is pending for enquiry. The Forum has no jurisdiction to grant the reliefs. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Opposite party No.3 filed counterstating that the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant is not entitled for the reliefs prayed for. This forum has no jurisdiction to grant the reliefs. For the legal notice got issued by the complainant, opposite party No.3 gave a reply. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party No.3. The disputes between the employer and employee are to be settled in labour court but not in
Consumer Forum. Opposite party No.3 is not a necessary party.The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A6 are marked and the sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. On behalf of the opposite parties Ex.B1 to B7 are marked and sworn affidavits of opposite parties 1 to 3 are filed.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. The points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS 1 and 2 :- Admittedly the complainant joined as a secretary in Primary Agricultural Society in the year 1973. He retired from service on 30-04-2008, while working as a Secretary of Holagunda Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Limited. Admittedly the complainant was not paid retirement benefits like gratuity. The complainant while he was in service addressed letter Ex.A1 to the President of the society claiming retirement benefits. Then president of the society also addressed a letter to the other secretary of the same society directing him to settle the retirement benefits due to the complainant. As the complainant was not paid gratuity amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.42,000/- towards earned leave he filed the present complaint against the opposite parties stating that there is deficiency of service on their part.
8. It is the case of the opposite parties that the complainant while working as a secretary of co-operative society misappropriated about Rs.9,33,366/- and that he is not entitled for gratuity amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.42,000/- towards earned leave. The opposite parties filed Ex.B4 copy of audit report where in it is mentioned that the complainant is concerned for with drawl of Rs.33,882/- from H.Kottala PACS during 2001 – 2002. In Ex.B5 also it is mentioned that as per the audit report 2007 – 2008 several amounts are recoverable from the complainant from 1991 – 1992 to 2007 – 2008. In the reply notice Ex.A6 dated 30-11-2009 also it is clearly mentioned that the complainant misappropriated the funds of the society and that he is not entitled for the retirement benefits. Whether the complainant misappropriated the funds of the society cannot be decided basing on the affidavit evidence. Admittedly the complainant before filing the present complaint filed M.P.No.32/2008 on the file of labour court Anantapur claiming the same reliefs. The first opposite party here in filed counter there in stating that an amount of Rs,3,03,129/- is due from the petitioner there in. There is a dispute in between the complainant and opposite parties regarding the payment of the retirement benefits to the complainant. The dispute between the employer and employee can be decided by special court established for that purpose. In a decision reported in II (2007) CPJ 191 (NC)it is held that it is not within court to increase multiplicity of litigation when another competent Quasi-Judicial Authority seized of same issue earlier in time. In the present case on hand the complainant already approached the labour court for same relief. As the auditors report is against the complainant the opposite parties are not in a position to settle the claim of the complainant. No deficiency of service is found on the part of the opposite parties.
9. It is the case of the opposite parties that the complainant filed M.P.No.32/2008 on the file of labour court Anantapur claiming the same reliefs and that the present complaint is filed suppressing facts. One who seeks justice must come to court with clean hands. The complainant nowhere in the complaint stated about the pendency of his petition in M.P.No.32/2008 on the file of labour court. As seen fromEx.B1 it is very clear that the complainant before approaching this Forum filed a petition before labour court claiming the very same reliefs. He suppressed the said fact and filed the present complaint. The complainant has come to Forum with unclean hands suppressing the real facts. Therefore we are not inclined to grant any relief to the complainant.
10. In the result the complaint is dismissed without cost.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the day 17thof May, 2011.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nill For the opposite parties:Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Letter dated 17-04-2008 issued by complainant to
opposite party No.1.
Ex.A2. Letter dated 12-04-2008 issued by opposite party No.1 to Secretary, Holagunda PACS.
Ex.A3 Letter dated 18-04-2008 issued by opposite party No.1 to
opposite party No.3.
Ex.A4 Letter dated 28-04-2008 isuued by opposite party No.1
to complainant.
Ex.A5 Office copy of legal notice dated 23-11-2009.
Ex.A6 Reply notice dated 30-11-2009.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of Counter cop in M.P.No.32/2008 of Labour Court, Anantapur.
Ex.B2 Photo copy of Notice dated 23-10-2009 of Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Adoni.
Ex.B3 Photo copy of Letter 30-04-2008 of Divisional Co-Operative Society, Adoni to opposite party No.1.
Ex.B4 Photo copy of Audit Report for the year 2001 - 2002.
Ex.B5 Photo copy of report submitted by opposite parties 1 & 2 regarding misappropriate amounts due by complainant.
Ex.B6 Photo copy of cash book of Honuerkottala PACS shown P.F. amount drawn by complainant on 27-06-1999.
Ex.B7 Photo copy of Proceedings of the commissioner for Cooperation and Registrar of Cooperative Societies, A.P. Hyderabad
Dated 22-10-2007.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
