District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No. 063/2019.

 Date of Institution:06.02.2019.

Date of Order: 25.01.2023.

Ram Pal S/o Shri Latur, R/o H.NO. 18, Vill. Ghasera, Palwal.

                                                                   …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

1.                The Proprietor M/s. Hare Krishna Engineers, Shop No. 29, Central Market, CGO Complex.

2.                M/s. A.S. Associates, Shop NO. 29, Central Market, CGO Complex, NH-4, Faridabad.

3.                The Regional Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Sector-15A, Faridabad.

                                                                   …Opposite parties……

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana………….Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh. Chander Sain,  counsel for the complainant.

                             Sh.   Raj Kumar Sharma, counsel for opposite party No.1.

                             Opposite party  No.2 given up vide order dated 07.04.2022.

                             Sh.  S.N.Tomar, counsel for opposite party No.3.

ORDER:  

The facts in brief of the complaint are that  the complainant remained in regular service of the opposite party company No.1 since 1.1.2001.  Right from day of joining, ESI & PF contributions had been deducted from the wages of the workman but never issued any receipt of PF & ESI to the workman.  Illegally, the service of the complainant had been terminated on 26.03.2018 at Faridabad.  The complainant was asked by opposite party No.1 to furnish the PF withdrawal from NO. DL/CPM/38527/10255 on the 2 establishment i.e. A.S. Establishment with the same address of opposite party No.2.  The date of termination had been shown to 31.01.2018 whereas, the date of termination of service was 26.03.2018,  The opposite parties seem to have conspired against the workman and the contribution deducted from the wages from 01.1.2001 till 26.03.2018 had not been deposited with PF at Faridabad.  This fact came to the notice of the complainant when on 01.03.2001 to 26.03.2018 he went to PF department at Faridabad for withdrawing his PF amount deposited in his account.  The complainant had been shocked to find that the amount deposited with opposite party NO.1 for PF department was missing and new company under the name of opposite party NO.2 of Delhi had been shown as the new owner at Delhi.  The complainant sent legal notice  dated 05.11.2018 to the opposite parties but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:

a)                imposing a penalty of Rs.50,000/- opposite party No.1 for not depositing the deducted amount in his account of P.F.

b)                produce the records of PF of workman truculently deposited of Faridabad or Delhi.

c)                both the opposite parties be fined with for Rs.1,00,000/- for fabricating the accounts and documents to show the claimant as employee of opposite party No.2 at Delhi, whereas the workman all at through at Faridabad office alone.

d)                deposit the amount deducted from the wages of complainant at Faridabad office.

e)                 pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

f)                  pay Rs. 30,000 /-as litigation expenses.

2.                Opposite party No.1  put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.1 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that   the Hon’ble Form had no jurisdiction to try & entertain the present case as the complainant was not a consumer qua the opposite party No.1 as  he was employee of opposite party No.1.  The present matter was covered under EPF & ID Act.  The complainant had not submitted the KYC for updation of his record with PF Department. Opposite party No. 1 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                Shri Chander Sain, counsel for the complainant has made a statement that he gives up OP No.2 M/s. A.S. Associates, Shop NO. 29, Central Market, CGO Complex, NH-4, Faridabad being  unnecessary.  Hence, opposite party No.2 was given from the array of the opposite parties vide order dated 07.04.2022.

4.                Opposite party No.3  put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.3 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that   the complainant had neither any cause of action nor locus standi to file the present complaint.  It was submitted that as per information given by the opposite party No.1, the service of the complainant had not been terminated but his service  was automatically stopped due to termination of the work contract from Govt. of India Press, Faridabad, in the month of February 2018.Opposite party No. 3 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.

5.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.

6.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties–The Prop. Hare Krishna Engineers with the prayer to: a)  imposing a penalty of Rs.50,000/- opposite party No.1 for not depositing the deducted amount in his account of P.F. b)         produce the records of PF of workman truculently deposited of Faridabad or Delhi. c)   both the opposite parties be fined with for Rs.1,00,000/- for fabricating the accounts and documents to show the claimant as employee of opposite party No.2 at Delhi, whereas the workman all at through at Faridabad office alone. d) deposit the amount deducted from the wages of complainant aft Faridabad office. e) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . f)  pay Rs. 30,000 /-as litigation expenses.

                   To establish his case the complainant  has led in his evidence,  Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Ram Pal, Ex.C-1 – legal notice, Ex.C-2 – legal notice, Ex.C-3 – postal receipt, Ex.C-4 – postal receipt, Ex.C-5 -  letter dated 10.12.2018, Ex.C-6 – letter dated 27.11.2018.

On the other hand counsel for the opposite party No.1 strongly

agitated and opposed.  As per the evidence of the opposite party  No.1 Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Ganga Dutt Bhardwaj, Proprietor of M/s. hare Krishna Engineering, Shop NO. 29, Central Market, Government Complex, NH-IV, NIT, Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – letter dated 12.03.2019 regarding  submitting the records of Shri Sompal, Rampal and Rashmi Ranjan Barik.

                   As per evidence of opposite party No.3, Ex. RWS3/A – affidavit of Shashikant Dahiya, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Legal), office of Employees Provident Fund Organization, Sector-15A, Faridabad.

7.                In this case, the complainant remained in the regular service of opposite party No.1 since 01.01.2001.  The complainant was employed by opposite party No. 1 on 09.01.2011 and he remained in the employment upto February, 2018.

 8.               As per affidavit of Shri Shashikant Dahiya, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Legal) vide Ex. RWS3/A, it is an admitted fact that as per the information received by opposite party No.3 from opposite party No.1, the complainant joined the establishment in April 2013 instead of January 2009 and his P.F. Contribution was made from 04./2013 and he was on roll of the establishment upto 02/2018.  Further the complainant became the member of P.F.

w.e.f. 04/2013 upto 02/2018 in the strength of the establishment, Hence, the complaint is allowed against opposite party No.3  to release the  amount of the complainant  as per the affidavit filed by opposite party No.3.

9..               After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed against opposite parties Nos.1 & 3.  Opposite party No.3 is directed to release the  deposited amount of the complainant

contributed by the employer of the complainant of his employment period. Opposite party No.1 is also directed to pay the  balance amount deducted from the wages of the complainant of the duration of the employment period. The opposite parties Nos..1 & 3 are also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment alongwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.  Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.  Copy of this order be given to the parties  concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.

Announced on: 25.01.2023                                  (Amit Arora)

                                                                                  President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                          (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                  Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                             (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                           Redressal Commission, Faridabad.