Jharkhand

StateCommission

A/168/2014

Kisto Bouri - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Project Officer/The Manager, C.M.E. Jeenagora Colliery, Bharat Coking Coal Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. R.A. Chamaria

29 Jul 2015

ORDER

JHARKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RANCHI
FINAL ORDER
 
First Appeal No. A/168/2014
(Arisen out of Order Dated 13/10/2014 in Case No. CC/110/2014 of District Dhanbad)
 
1. Kisto Bouri
Hattalla Basti ( Bandh Dhoura ), P.O. & PS.- Patherdih
Dhanbad
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. The Project Officer/The Manager, C.M.E. Jeenagora Colliery, Bharat Coking Coal Limited
Lodna Area, P.O.- Khas Jeenagora, Pin-828115
Dhanbad
2. The Provident Fund Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund Organization
Jagjivan Nagar, P.O.- Dhanbad
Dhanbad
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. Merathia PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Ajit Kumar MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
Mr. R.A. Chamaria, Advocate
 
For the Respondent:
None
 
ORDER

29-07-2015 - Inspite of fixing this case for passing ex-parte order, nobody appears for the Respondents.

  1. On being satisfied with the grounds, the delay of about 5 days in filing this appeal is condoned.
  2. The members of learned District Consumer Forum, Dhanbad has differed on the point of limitation. The President and one member dismissed the complaint on the ground that it was barred by limitation, as the complainant superannuated on 31.03.2008 but the complaint case was filed in 2014. One of the members, was of the opinion that the complaint was not barred by the limitation, in view of the letter dated 27.11.2013 issued by BCCL – R-1.
  3. It appears that certain correspondences were going on between the offices of R – 1; and between R– 1 and R–2 regarding payment of provident fund amount of the appellant, due to certain discrepancies, in his account number etc.  
  4. It further appears from the letter dated 27.11.2013 that R–1 requested R–2 to make the payment of C.M.P.F. contribution in the A/c No. C/29/2331 and C/29/2333 to the complainant– Sri Kisto Bauri No. 1, S/o – Nathu Bauri. Even then payment was not made, and therefore the complaint was filed.
  5. After going through the brief and hearing Mr. Chamaria, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, we are satisfied that the complaint case was not barred by limitation.
  6. It appears that there is no dispute that the complainant is entitled to receive his legally payable amount. In the facts and circumstances it will not be proper to remand back the matter.
  7. Accordingly we direct the Respondents to jointly ensure the payment of legally receivable amount to the appellant within 60 days of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, they will be individually and severally liable to pay simple interest on the said amount @ 9% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment/realization, and for which the officer(s) concerned will be personally liable.

With these observations and directions this appeal stands allowed.

Let a free copy of the order be issued immediately.

Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

     Ranchi                                 

Dated:- 29-07-2015

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. Merathia]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ajit Kumar]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.