Karnataka

Kolar

CC/66/2016

Sri.Subbaraju - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.D.V.Lakshminarayana

05 Jun 2017

ORDER

Date of Filing: 19/10/2016

Date of Order: 05/06/2017

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 05^TH DAY OF JUNE 2017

PRESENT

SMT. PRATHIBHA.R.K., BAL LLM, PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL., LLB           ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.66 OF 2016

Sri. Subbaraju,

S/o. D. Papanna,

Aged About 64 Years,

Tulasiram Building Swarna Nagar

7^th Cross, Robertsonpet, K.G.F.

Kolar District.                                      ….  COMPLAINANT.

(Rep. by Sri.D.V.Laxminarayana, Advocate)

 

- V/s -

The Regional Provident Fund

Commissioner,

Old Madras Road, K.R. Puram,

BANGALORE.

 

(Rep. by Sri. Jayaprakash, Enforcement Officer,

Employees Provident Fund Organization, Kolar.) …. OPPOSITE PARTY.

 

-: ORDERS:-

BY SMT. PRATHIBHA.R.K., BAL LLM, PRESIDENT

01.   The complainant has filed this complaint against the OP Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to direct the OP to re-fix the pension by taking consideration of 02 years weightage along with interest and compensation of Rs.10,000/- for the mental agony as well as costs of Rs.5,000/-.

 

02.   The facts in brief:-

(a)    The complainant submitted that, he was an employee of PCA & RD Bank and the complainant had joined for service on 01.12.1976 in Bangarpet, after serving for 36 years of service in Thuruvekere, Bangarpet and in Mulbagal he got retired from his service on 29.02.2012 (on completion of 60 years i.e., superannuation).  The complainant further submitted that, for the 36 years of service the OP has deducted provident fund amount from the complainant’s monthly salary towards EPS.  The complainant further submitted that, as per PYKRP No.00022103 and Provident Fund Act the OP without considering 02 years weightage of the complainant had fixed Rs.1,250/- towards monthly pension and same was transferred to K.G.F. Robertsonpet Canara Bank SB Account bearing No.06711010402290 (complainant’s account).   

 

(b)    Further complainant submitted that, as per the Provident Fund Act, 1952, Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 and Employees Pension Scheme 1996 “a person who serves for more than 20 years is entitled for 02 years of weightage while calculating the pension benefits.  But without considering 02 years weightage and though the complainant has served 36 years of service the OP has calculated the pension amount. 

 

(c)    It is further contended that as per the findings of the Hon’ble State Commission in Appeal Nos. 415/2008 to 419/2008 it is held that such cause of action is recurring, hence the complaint is in time.

 

(d)    So contending the present complaint has been submitted seeking above set out reliefs.

 

(e)    Along with the complaint the complainant has submitted following documents:-

1. Copy of the Robertsonpet KGF Canara Bank SB account Pass-Book.
2. Copy of the Employees Provident Fund Organization(EPFO) Letter No. Pension – 1/3(4) 16/7915, dated: 25.07.2016.
3. Copy of the Employer order related to total service of 36 years.

 

03.   In response to the notice issued by this Forum, one Sri.D.Jayaprakash, an Enforcement Officer of the OP appeared and represented the case on behalf of the OP and submitted written version.

 

(a)    The OP contends that, the complainant was an employee of M/s. PCA & RD Bank Limited, Bangarpet and the said Bank was covered under the provisions Act, 1952 with effect from 01.11.1996 and had been allotted the Code No.KN/19540.  The copy of the Return of employees who were entitled and required to become members of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Pension Fund furnished by the employer showing the date of coverage of the establishment and date for which employees pension scheme is applicable as 01.11.1996.  Thus it is evident that the complainant even though reportedly had been working with the above said Bank from 01.12.1976 had become the member of the following schemes framed under the EPF & MP Act, 1952 only with effect from 01.11.1996 consequent to the above application of the Act on the above said Bank.

 

(b) The complaint filed by the complainant is bad for non-joinder of necessary party of PCARD Bank who was the employer of the complainant and who is responsible for enrollment of the complainant as a PF member from the date she becomes eligible to become a member.    The complainant was not at all a member of the Family Pension Scheme, 1971, but only the member of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 with effect from 01.11.1996 which had replaced the above said Family Pension Scheme, 1971 with effect from 16.11.1995.  Therefore there was no past service, as such, rendered by the complainant as claimed by him.  The authority had issued Pension Payment Order (PPO) No.PY/KRP/00022103, dated: 19.02.2013 sanctioning a monthly pension of Rs.1,250/- with effect from 19.04.2010 in accordance with the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995.  The contributory service rendered under the Employees' Pension Scheme is only 13 years 5 months 18 days. 

(c)    The OP submit that, Para-10(2) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 which reads as below:

10. Determination of Pensionable Service.

(2) In the case of the member who superannuates on attaining the age of 58 years, and who has rendered 20 years pensionable service or more, his pensionable service shall be increased by adding a weightage of 2 years.

(d)    Further the OP submitted that, Para-10(2) of EPS, 1995 clearly states that, the members who has rendered 20 years of pensionable service from 16.11.1995 is eligible for weightage of 02 years.

(e)    Further OP contention is that, in the instant case the complainant has rendered only 13 years 5 months 18 days of pensionable service i.e., less than 20 years of pensionable service from 16.11.1995 under the EPS, 1995.  Therefore the complainant is not eligible for the weightage of two years under Para 10(2) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 as per the EPFO, Head Office, New Delhi letter No. Pension-I/3(4)16/7915, dated: 25.07.2016.  So contending the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint, sought for costs.

 

(f)     Along with the written version the OP had submitted a return of employee who are entitled and required to become members of the EPF and pension Fund.

 

04.   On 02.01.2017 the complainant submitted his affidavit evidence and on 12.01.2017 counsel appearing for OP has submitted affidavit evidence of one Mr.Kaushal Singh, S/o. Sangram Singh, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner of OP.

 

05.   On 13.02.2017 counsel appearing for OP has submitted written arguments and on 04.04.2017 counsel appearing for complainant has submitted complainant’s written arguments.

 

06.   On 02.05.2017 we have heard the oral arguments as advanced by the learned counsels appearing for both sides.

 

07.   Therefore the points that do arise for consideration in the above case are:-

(A)  Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service against the OP?

(B) Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for ?

(C)  What order?

 

08.   Our findings on the above stated points are:-

POINT (A) & (B):      In the Affirmative

 

POINT (C):               As per final order for

the following:-

 

REASONS

POINT (A) & (B):-

 

09.   It is an admitted fact that, complainant was an employee of PCA & RD Bank and retired from service on 29.02.2012.  It is the contention of the complainant that, the complainant served for 36 years in PCA & RD Bank.  As per Provident Fund Act, 1952, Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 and as per the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 the complainant is eligible for 02 years of weightage benefits, but the Ops have not given 02 years weghtage to the complainant.  In this regard the complainant has submitted a document issued by the PCA & RD Bank, Bangarpet taluk, Kolar District.  The OP has taken a contention stating that, the complainant was not a member of this Family Pension Scheme, 1971, but the complainant is only the member of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 and the complainant has not made PCA & RD Bank as a party to this complaint.

 

10.   On perusal of the document issued by the PCA & RD Bank it can be seen by bare eye the whole document is a Xerox copy.  On the bottom of the Xerox copy it has been written as hereunder:-

 

ªÀÄÄA¢£À ªÀAwPÉUÀ¼ÀÄ E¦J¸ï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀj¹gÀÄvÉÛ.
(1) PÁAiÉÄÝ 1971 ¨sÀ«µÀå ¤¢ü AiÉÆÃd£É C£ÀéAiÀÄ 1982 ªÀiÁZïð ¬ÄAzÀ r¸ÉA§gï CAvÀåPÉÌ EJ¥sï¦J¸ï AiÉÆÃd£É ¥ÀæPÁgÀ MlÄÖ 14 ªÀµÀð 9 wAUÀ¼ÀÄ	14 ªÀµÀð 9 wAUÀ¼ÀÄ
(2) PÁAiÉÄÝ 1995gÀ E¦J¸ï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ°è d£ÀªÀj 1997jAzÀ 2010gÀ K¦æ¯ï ªÀiÁºÉUÉ (58 ªÀµÀð ªÀAiÉÆëÄwUÉ C£ÀéAiÀÄ)	13 ªÀµÀð 3 wAUÀ¼ÀÄ
¨sÀ«µÀå ¤¢ü AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ°è ¸À°è¹zÀ MlÄÖ ¸ÉêÉ	28 ªÀµÀðUÀ¼ÀÄ

 

The said document is in Xerox and on the top it has been written and the same cannot be believed.  Further it can be seen that, at top of the page it has mentioned as student name, class, subject, role number, date and total marks obtained.  Hence the said document is only to make believe this Forum and the same cannot be accepted.  Hence the contention of the complainant that, the complainant was the member of Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 cannot be accepted.  Moreover the complainant has not made the PCA & RD Bank as a party to this proceedings.

 

11.   Admittedly the complainant joined Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 as per the PPO No.PY/KRP/00022103.  Para-10(2) of the Employees Pension Scheme 1995 reads as:-

“10. Determination of Pensionable Service. –

(1) The pensionable service of the member shall be determined with reference to the contributions received or receivable on his behalf in the Employees’ Pension Fund.

(2) In the case of the member who superannuates on attaining the age of 58 years, and/or who has rendered 20 years pensionable service or more, his pensionable service shall be increased by adding a weightage of 02 years.”

 

From the above it is clear that, those who superannuates on attaining the age of 58 years or those who render 20 years of pensionable service or more, are eligible for weightage of 02 years.  Admittedly the complainant had retired/superannuated at the age of 58 years.  And hence as per as per Para-10(2) of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 the complainant is eligible for 02 years of weightage. 

 

12.   The OP has taken a contention stating that, the complainant has rendered only 13 years 05 months 18 days of pensionable service i.e., less than 20 years of pensionable service.  As per Para-10(2) of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 was amended substituting the words “and/or” with “and” w.e.f. 24.07.2009.  Though the complainant has completed 58 years on 18.04.2010 which is after amendment i.e., 24.07.2009.  Hence complainant had to complete both condition of attaining 58 years as well as putting 20 years of pensionable service.  Since complainant has not completed 20 years of eligible service.  Hence complainant is not entitled for the weightage of 02 years under Para-10(2) of the EPS scheme 1995 and as per the EPFO Head Office Circular dated: 25.07.2016.  This argument is not justifiable because at the time of entering in to the scheme by the complainant no such provision were existing and there is no material evidence available on record to show that, the same is applicable retrospectively.

 

13.   Further the Circular issued by the EPFO Head Office cannot be considered as an amendment to the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995.  As per Para-10(2) of the Employees Pension Scheme the complainant has retired/superannuated at the age of 58 years, hence complainant is entitled for 02 years of weightage.  Hence it is just and proper to direct the OP to recalculate the pension of the complainant by adding 02 years of weightage and to pay the arrears along with 12% interest from the date of retirement of the complainant and accordingly we answered point (A) & (B) in the affirmative.

 

POINT (C)

14.   We proceed to pass the following:-

 

 

05.06.2017:-

COMPLAINANT/BY SRI.

OPPOSITE PARTY/BY SRI.

ORDER

01.   The complaint is allowed with costs of Rs.2,000/-.

 

02.   The OP is directed to re-fix the pension amount of the complainant by adding 02 years of weightage and also to pay the arrears along with 12% interest from the date of retirement of the complainant till realization.

 

03    The OP is further directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt/knowledge of this order.

 

04.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of costs.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer in the Open Forum, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 05^th DAY OF JUNE 2017)

 

 

MEMBER                                      PRESIDENT