BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President
Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B. Com., LL.B., Member
Wednesday the 29th day of March, 2006.
C.D.No.43/2005
1. Feroza Bee,
W/o Late. D.Shabbeer Ahammed,
Representing the minor petitioners 2 and 3
2. Fathima, aged 20 years,
3. Rizwana, aged 19 years,
Petitioner 2 and 3 are the children of
Late D.Shabbeer Ahammed and Petitioner No.1,
All the above are R/o H.No.46/163-26-20,
Budhwarpet, Kurnool. . . . Complainants
-Vs-
1. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,
Employees Provident Fund Organisation,
Regional Office, Barkathpura,
Hyderabad.
2. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,
Employees Provident Organisation,
Sub-Regional Office, Kadapa. . . . Opposite parties
This complaint coming on this day for Orders in the presence of Sri T.Kumar Babu, Advocate, Kurnool for complainant and Sri L.Viswanatham, Advocate, Kurnool for opposite party No.2, and opposite party No.1 represented by in person and stood over for consideration, till this day, the Forum made the following.
O R D E R
(As per Sri.R.Ramachandra Reddy, Hon’ble Member)
1. This CD case of the complainant is filed under sections 11 and 12 of C.P. Act, seeking direction on the opposite parties to grant monthly member pension regularly at the rate of Rs.150/- per month per each minor, to grant sum of Rs.26,700/- as pension arrears after the death of member i.e. from 1-10-1997 to till the month of March, 2005 to the minors and to grant a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony along with other remedies which the exigencies of the case demand.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that her husband was joined as Bedi worker (Home worker) and he died on 30-9-1997 and the opposite party No.2 issued Pension Payment Orders (P.P.O No.AP/CDP/9942). There after the complainant is getting widow pension on 1-10-1997. As per the Employs Pension Scheme 1995 “ Two children of the deceased member shall be entitled to children pension up to the age of 25 years in addition to pension to widow/widower” accordingly after the death of the member the Pension Payment Orders were issued by the opposite party No.2, which clearly shows the ages of the family members. Duly accepting the ages of the minors the Pension Payment Orders were issued by the opposite party No.2 but the said opposite party No.2 is not sanctioning the children pension on the ground that “The date of the birth certificate of the children below the age of 25 years are required”. After accepting the ages of the family members the opposite party No.2 has issued the Pension Payment Orders. Instead of acting on the particulars which may be accepted by the opposite party No.2 the said opposite party No.2 is wilfully not sanctioning the children pension on vexatious grounds even after the instructions of the opposite party No.1 on 9-11-2004 the opposite party No.2 did not initiate the action and as not done anything so far. As this unduly abnormal time taken by the said opposite party No.2 in not sanctioning the children pension so far, due to the said deficient conduct of the opposite parties the complainants suffered much mental agony.
3. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainants, the opposite party No.2 caused his appearance through its counsel and opposite party No.1 through its Endorsement Officer, Kurnool and contested the case by adopting the written version of opposite party No.2 denying any of deficiency of service on its part and there by any of their liability to the claim of the complainants and so seeking dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4. The written version of the opposite party No.2, the same was adopted by the opposite party No.1 admits that D.Shabbin Ahmed S/o Abdul Zabbar was member under E.P.F and M.P. Act, 1952 with code No.AP/29457/32 by virtue of his employment in M/s Syed Aslam and Brothers, Kurnool with effect from 1-9-1995 and said D.Shabbin Ahmed was died on 30-9-1997. Smt. Firoza Bee, W/o Late D.Shabbin Ahmed is eligible for monthly pension under para 16 of E.P.S scheme, 1995 with effect from 1-10-1997 onwards and accordingly Smt.Firoza Bee has been sanctioned monthly widow pension with effect from 1-10-1997 vide Pension Payment Orders No.CP/9942 and as per 16 (3) of E.P.S 1995 the children pension is admissible to the children below 25 years, shall be admissible to the maximum of 2 children at a time and will run from the oldest to the youngest child, (As per 16 (3) of E.P.S 1995) in addition to monthly widow pension but it is not correct to say that opposite party No.2 as accepted the date of birth of children in the absence of date of birth certificate of children whereas the date of birth certificates of children are essential/compulsorily required in order to determine the eligibility and cessaition of pension on the completion of the 25 years to each child and to get the eligibility to the surviving at all. But whereas the complainant has furnished the only age in column No.12 of form No.10-D. The complainant has submitted date of birth certificate for 3 children i.e. Rizwana, Abdulla and Fathima only out of 7 children along with form No. 10-D. In order to issue Pension Payment Order this office has assumed dates of birth on date as per the age furnished in form No.10-D (only for the purpose of generation of Pension Payment Orders) and called for the dates of birth of the children from school/Panchayat/Municipal/Registration of birth (as applicable). Since the said authenticated certificates of date of birth of minor children has not filed as such there is no default on the part of opposite party No.2 in calling for the said dates of birth certificates and hence there is no deficiency of service and seeks the dismissal of the complaint.
5. In substantiation of the case averments while the complainants side had relied upon the documentary record in Ex.A1 to A4, besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of its case, the opposite parties side has relied up on the documentary record in Ex.B1 (20 pages) and its sworn affidavit in reiteration of its defence. Further, the complainant and opposite parties exchanged between them interrogatories and their replies along with their written arguments for the appreciation of their case.
6. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out the alleged deficiency of service in the conduct of the opposite parties, in not paying monthly member pension regularly for the minor children of the complainant and pension arrears after the death of the member i.e. complainants husband so as to enable to herself to the reliefs claimed?
7. The Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of Pension Payment Order No.AP/CDP/9942 dated 15-7-2002 of PF account No.AP/29457/32 of the complainant’s husband issued by the opposite party No.2 which consists of 20 pages. The page No.1 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of letter of opposite party No.2 dated 11-8-2005 addressed to the complainant No.1 requesting here to inform the SB account No. and addressed to the bank and date of birth certificates of children below 25 years are required from registration of births/municipal/panchayat/school authorised (1+2) on the date of the death of member, whereas this letter has been sent by the opposite party No.2 after filing this case i.e. on 7-4-2005 not even on the date of first appearance i.e. on 10-5-2005. The page No.2 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of letter of opposite party No.2 dated 12-7-2002 addressed to the complainant No.1 under copy to Branch Manager, SBI, Budwarpet, Kurnool requesting her to contact the Manger of her bank, (SBI (0003185) Budwarpet, Kurnool SB Account No.37/13224) along with the said letter i.e. page No.2 of Ex.B1 for receiving the pensioners copy of Pension Payment Order and payment including arrears. Here in this typed letter the date was altered as 15-7-2002, the minor children names were rounded of and added figure with a remark as “ Withheld for want of dates of birth particulars and bank account numbers”” without any initials in hand writing. This act of opposite party No.2 leads to suspicion as to proof of the said hand made alterations without proper attestation of the concerned officer with seal as it was very important document, which opposite party No.2 relied in defence of its case. The page No.3 of Ex.B1 is an attested copy of letter of opposite party No.2 dated 12-7-2002 addressed to the complainant No.1 under copy to the SBI, Budwarpet, Kurnool with instructions informing the said bank that until further notice and on expiry of every month be pleased to pay Smt.Firoza Bee (Complainant -1) the pension as set out in part-II of this order, widow pension and the children pension as set out in part -3 of this order after due verification of the pension/family pension including children pension. The page 4 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of part –I on Sl.No.16 the details of family members/nominee/dependent parents eligible for pension in the event of death of member. The particulars are mentioned in it are as follows.
S.No. | Name&Address | Relationship | Date of Birth |
1 | Feroza Bee H.No.46/163-26-20,Budwarpet,Kurnool | Wife | 10-5-1952 |
2 | Fathima H.No.46/163-26-20,Budwarpet,Kurnool | Daughter | 7-4-1985 |
3 | Rizwana H.No.46/163-26-20,Budwarpet,Kurnool | Daughter | 22-11-1986 |
The above said three members are complainants 1, 2 and 3 respectively. The page No.6 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of part-II as mentioned at page 3 of Ex.B1. The page No.8 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of Pension Payment Order sl.No.1to 6 are detailed particulars of member (Complainants-1s husband). After S.No.6 details of family members\nominee\dependent eligible for pension in the event of the death of member. The details of said family members etc., are same as mentioned at Part-I page No.4 of Ex.B1. The page 14 is an attested Xerox copy of Ex.B1 is of E.P.S 1995, pension worksheet part-A dated 4-7-2002 pertaining to complainants 1, 2 and 3. The page No.15 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy is computation of pension part B. The page No.16 is an attested Xerox copy of Ex.B1 is computation of widow-Part C. The page No.17 is an attested Xerox copy of E.P.S 1995 in-put data sheet pertaining to complainant No.1s husband i.e. member. The page No.18 is an attested Xerox copy of continuation of page No.17, which contains at Sl.No.26 details of other family members/nominee. Wherein complainants 1, 2 and 3 names, relation, date of birth and address mentioned and citified that the particulars furnished above have been verified from records and found correct and signed by clerk with date as 15-5-2002, S.S with date as 16-5-2002 and A.A.O with date as 17-5-2002. In for office use (pension branch) only, under this there is a note submitted as Since proof of date of birth in respect of children have not been available, accounts group had called for the same, widow pension may be released, on receipt of the date of birth certificates of the children, the children pension will be released, widow pension may first be released, signed by the clerk with date as 25-6-2002 A.O date not clear, Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner’s date not clear without seal. It is not clear when account group had called for the proof of date of birth certificates in respect of children not forthcoming in the above Ex.B1. The page 20 of Ex.B1 is an attested Xerox copy of the death certificate of the member which is not in dispute, hence, no further appreciation is necessary about the said document.
8. The Ex.A1 is the Pension Payment Order (Pensioners portion) para-I which is nothing but page 4 of the Ex.B1. The Ex.A2 is an attested Xerox copy of letter No.320/6/211 dated 23-1-2001 addressed by the Andhra Bank to the opposite party No.2 about the Pension Payment Order of C.O.P 2777 and payments of pension in the account of SB Account No.16924 of one Kumari S.Noorzahan wherein it is advised to the said bank to send the date of birth certificate or a letter from opposite party No.2 stating that she attained majority for withdrawal of money from her account. The Ex.A3 is an attested office copy of letter No.A.P/S.R.O/CP/GAB-4/CP/2777/2001/6319 dated 26-2-2001 addressed by the opposite party No.2 in reply to the Ex.A2 to the Branch Manager, Andhra Bank, Kurnool. Wherein the opposite party No.2 clearly mentioned that the date of birth of the said Noorzahan was taken on the basis of family members certificate submitted by the employer of the establishment (Copy of the F.M.C of the deceased is enclosed) Further in the claim in form 10-D at the column of family particulars of the deceased member the age of said Noorzahan was given as 12 years and based on her age found in the F.M.C her date of birth is worked out as 8-7-1977 assuming that her age was found as on the date of death of the member. The Ex.A4 is an attested office copy of the letter No.AP/R.O/PEN-II/SRO-CDP/PPO No.9942/2004/346 dated 9-11-2004 addressed by the opposite party No.1 to the opposite party No.2 under copy to the complainant No.1 in reference to the letter dated 8-11-2004 of her wherein the opposite party No.1 mentioned that the opposite party No.2 was requested to look into the matter and initiate an immediate action and communicate the development of the case to the pensioner under copy to the opposite party No.1. The Ex.A2 and A3 clearly exposed the attitude of discrepancy and indifferent treatment to one pensioner and another pensioner by the opposite party No.2 in allowing the proof of age as per the F.M.C (Ex.A3) and not allowing the same age proof to the complainants 2 and 3 as per Ex.A1. The reason for this type of attitude to one pensioner and another pensioners (Complainants 2 and 3) are best known to the opposite party No.2 above which are not explained in its written arguments of opposite party No.2. Further, the opposite party No.2 in its arguments at para 5 taken pleas such as, the complainant has to file guardian application to seek remedy on behalf of her children if not there must be a power of attorney given by the children to the complainant to file the complaint. As per complaint of the complainant No.1, the ages of complainants 2 and 3 are mentioned as 20 years and 19 years if the opposite party No.2 so deligent and conscious about said pleas he would have taken the same pleas in its written version which was the first opportunity to him, but no such whisper in it. At page No.18 of Ex.B1 there was a endorsement that widow pension (complainant No.1) may first be released as back as 25-6-2002. Even the opposite party No.2 was asked by opposite party No.1 as back as 9-11-2004 (Ex.A4), only on 11-8-2005 (page No.1 of Ex.B1), opposite party No.2 sent the above said dated letter i.e. 11-8-2005 to the complainant No.1 to submit the proof of ages of complainants 2 and 3 as per the Sl.No.2, this delayed letter i.e. which was sent after filing the case by the complainants in this Forum and Forum asked the opposite party No.1 and 2 to appear before the said Forum on 10-5-2005 i.e. after three months i.e. 11-8-2005. The opposite party No.1 also after sending Ex.A4 letter to the opposite party No.2 as not taken any follow up action and adopted the written version of opposite party No.2 on 4-7-2005.
9. At part 7 of the written arguments filed on behalf of opposite party No.1 it was mentioned that form 10-D submitted by the complainant contain ages of the children and this office has arrived the date of birth basing on the particulars of form 10-D and same are furnished only to generate the P.P.O, since the system of computers doesn’t accept the ages. This plea of opposite party No.1 is not at all tenable in the circumstances of the case as per Ex.B1 of pages 17 and 18 and Ex.A2 and A3.
10. The written arguments filed on behalf of the complainants the counsel of the complainants referred chapter 6 of the manual of the accounting procedure part III employees pension scheme 1995, in its arguments regarding the age wherein at 6.1-3 of the above said scheme it is mentioned that “ The particulars of age of the member as available in form 9 (Revised)/form 3 (PS)/form 2 (Revised) should be relied upon to determine the eligibility for benefits etc.,” and 6.1-4 it is mentioned that “ Whenever there is a variation in the date of birth/age is noticed the age as furnished by the employer through form 9/3 (PS) and form 5/4 (PS) alone should be relied upon. But no where mentioned that complainants have to produce the date of birth certificates of children below 25 years are required from registration of birth/municipal/panchayat/school authorised. If opposite party No.2 so mindful and conscious of their proof of age from the above authorities he should have been insisted at the time of obtaining family member certificate once the opposite party No.2 accepted the date of births of pensioners which are mentioned in F.M.C at part-I of pension payment order (Pensioners portion) as accepted in the case of Ex.A3, he should have accepted the same in this case also without any discrimination between one pensioner or another pensioner. The complainant’s counsel in its written arguments cited two judgements viz (1) AIR 2000 SC 331 (2) III (2003) CPJ 10 (NC) but not filed the text of same for their appreciation in this case whereas the complainants counsel relied on the judgement of Supreme Court about the admissibility of Ex.A1 and A3 which were discussed in A.I.R 1971 S.C 1295 (V58C261). Wherein at (F) it was discussed about evidence act (1872) section 3 about the admissibility of document procured by illegal means there is no bar to its admissibility. The fact that document was procured by improper or even illegal means will not be a bar to its admissibility, if it is relevant and its genuineness proved. But while examining the proof given as to its genuineness, the circumstances under which it came to be produced into court have to be taken into consideration. Here in this Forum natural justice prevails, so it is not improper to take into consideration the evidence of Ex.A2 and A3 for their appreciation in this case of the complainants.
11. Hence, the opposite party No.1 and 2 miserably failed to substantiate their case against the cogent material filed by the complainant’s side, the act of opposite party No.1 and 2 in not granting monthly member pension regularly at the rate of 150/- per month per each child i.e. two children of complainant No.1 which amounts to Rs.26,700/- as pension arrears after the date of death of the member i.e. from 1-10-1997 to till the month of March 2005 for the above said complainants 2 and 3, as is remaining without any justifiable excuse, the said conduct of opposite party No.1 and 2 is certainly amounting to failure on the part of opposite party No.1 and 2 in performing this statutory duty in not granting the above said amount to complainants 2 and 3 and there by amounting to the deficiency of service and there by entitling the complainants 2 and 3 to the claim as the bonafidies of complainants’ claim are not other wise disturbed.
12. In the results and in sum up of the above discussion the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties 1 and 2 jointly and severally to pay monthly member pension regularly at the rate of Rs.150/- per month to the each complainant i.e. No.2 and 3 to pay the pension arrears of Rs.26,700/- to the said complainants 2 and 3 after the date of death of the member i.e. from 1-10-1997 to till the month of March 2005 with interest at 9% per annum, to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and to pay Rs.1,000/- towards cost of this case and that the opposite party No.1 and 2 is granted one month time for the compliance of this order. In default, the opposite party No.1 and 2 shall pay the supra awarded amount with 12% interest per annum from the date of the said default till the date of till realisation.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum this the 29th day of March, 2006.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant: Nil For the opposite parties: Nil
Exhibits Marked for the complainants:
Ex.A1 Attested Xerox copy of Pension Payment Order (P.P.O)
Ex.A2 Attested copy of letter Dt.23-1-2001 addressed to Asst. P.F. Commissioner (Pension) Kadapa.
Ex.A3 Attested copy of letter, Dt.26-2-2001 addressed to Branch Manager, Kurnool
Ex.A4 Attested copy of letter, Dt.9-11-2004 addressed to officer-in-charge, Kadapa.
Exhibits Marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1 Attested copy of Pension Payment Order.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
Copy to:-
1. Sri. T.Kumar Babu, Advocate, Kurnool
2. Sri. L.Viswanatham, Advocate, Kurnool
3. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund
Organisation, Regional Office, Barkathpura, Hyderabad.
Copy was made ready on:
Copy was dispatched on:
Copy was delivered to parties on:
