Karnataka

StateCommission

A/2177/2017

The Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner - Complainant(s)

Versus

Basalingappa - Opp.Party(s)

Nandita Haldipur

05 May 2023

ORDER

                                                                 Date of Filing : 02.11.2017

  Date of Disposal : 05.05.2023

 

BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

 

DATED : 05.05.2023

 

PRESENT

 

HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

 

 

APPEAL Nos.2168/2017 to 2186/2017

 

 

The Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner,
Regional Office 2^nd Floor,

Garaladinni Complex,

Saath Kacheri Road,

Raichur-584 101.
(By Mrs Nandita Haldipur, Advocate)                                          Appellant

(Appellant is same in all the Appeals)

 

             -Versus-

1.Appeal No.2168/2017

1. Mr Nandeppa,
    S/o Mr Girimallappa Tuppad,

    Age 67 years,

    R/o Rameshwar Colony,

    Girish Nagar,

    Jamakhandi,  

    Bagalkot District                                                                

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot.                                                 Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

2.Appeal No.2169/2017

1. Mr Gurupadappa,
    S/o Mr Rudrappa Mugati,

    Age 66 years,

    Occ: R/o Mugati Galli,

    Banahatti, Jamakhandi,

    Bagalkot District.

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

3.Appeal No.2170/2017

1. Mr Allappa,
    S/o Mr Basalingappa Kumbar,

    Age 65 years,

    R/o Villagaddi Oni,

    Near Veerabhadraeshwara Temple,

    At Post & Tq :Jamakhandi,

    Bagalkot District

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot.                                                 Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

4.Appeal No.2171/2017

1. Mr Sabanna,
    S/o Mr Mallappa Bisanal,

    Age 66 years,

    R/o Shiraguppi,

    Tq: Jamakhandi

    Bagalkot District                                                        Respondents

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

5.Appeal No.2172/2017

1. Mr Bharamappa,
    S/o Mr Basappa Padasalagi,

    Age 75 years,

    R/o Kadapatti,

    Tq: Jamakhandi,

    Bagalkot District.

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

6.Appeal No.2173/2017

1. Mr Sangappa,
    S/o Mr Shivappa Hargan,

    Age 64 years,

    R/o Maitri Galli,

    Ward No.5,

    At Post & Tq: Jamakhandi,

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

 2. The Divisional Controller,
     NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

     Divisional office,

     Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                 Respondents

     (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

7.Appeal No.2174/2017

1. Mr Krishnaji,
    S/o Mr Anant Kulkarni,

    Age 64 years  

    Retd., employee of

    Godavari Sugar Mill Ltd.,

    Sameerwad, 

    C/o M.V.Anawatti,

    Shivasagar Park,

    2^nd Main, 4^th Cross,

    Gomanagatti Road, Hubli,

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Managing Director.

    Godavari Sugar Mill Ltd..

    Sameerwad.

    Tq:Mudhol.

    Bagalokot District.                                                     Respondents

    (By Mr P.S.Manjunath, Advocate)

 

8.Appeal No.2175/2017

1. Mr Chandrashekar,
    S/o Mr Gurubasappa Shedabal,

    Age 69 years,

    R/o Junjurkop Galli,

    Mudhol, Tq: Mudhol,

    Bagalkot District.

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

9.Appeal No.2176/2017

1. Mr Ajamuddin,
    S/o Mr Shamasuddin Hundekar,

    Age 65 years,

    Occ:Rtd. KSRTC Employee

    Residence of Rameshwar Colony,

    Jamakhandi.

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

10.Appeal No.2177/2017

1. Mr Basalingappa,
    S/o Mr Guruppa Dalal,

    Age 77 years,

    R/o Bazar Road,

    At Post: Lokapur,

    Tq: Mudhol, Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

 

11.Appeal No.2178/2017

1. Mr Liyakat,
    S/o Mr Balekhan Teradal,

    Age 63 years,

    R/o Ramateertha Road,

    Near Forest Office,

    At Post & Tq. Jamakhandi

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

12.Appeal No.2179/2017

1. Mr Parashuram,
    S/o Mr Durgaji Ganachari

    Age 63 years,

    R/o Bharpet Galli,

    Near Shivaji Circle,

    At Post & Tq. Jamakhandi

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

 2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

13.Appeal No.2180/2017

1. Mr Ilahi,
    S/o Mr Suleman Ghori,

    Aged about 64 years,

    R/at Pendari Galli,

    Jamakhandi Post & Tq.,

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

14.Appeal No.2181/2017

1. Mr Abdul Khadar,
    S/o Mr Babusab Qureshi,

    Aged about 61 years,

    R/at Sadanad Colony,

    Oni Plot, Jamakhandi Post & Tq.,

    Bagalkot District.

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

 2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

15.Appeal No.2182/2017

1. Mr Mehaboobpasha,
    S/o Mr Hakisab Pendari,

    Aged about 68 years,

    R/at Bharpetgalli,

    Near Shivaji Circle,

    Jamakhandi Post & Tq.,

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

16.Appeal No.2183/2017

1. Mr Basavaraj,
    S/o Mr Shrishailappa Malabadi,

    Aged about 62 years,

    R/at Hulyal,

    Jamakhandi Tq.,

    Bagalkot District

   (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

17.Appeal No.2184/2017

1. Mr Hussensab,
    S/o Mr Kutubuddin Sangtrass,

    Aged about 68 years,

    R/at Bharpet Galli,

    Near Shivaji Circle,

    Jamakhandi Post & Tq.,

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

 2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

18.Appeal No.2185/2017

1. Mr Rajasab,
    S/o Mr Chandasab Reradal,

    Aged about 63 years,

    R/at Rameshwar Colony,

    Near Housing Society

    Jamakhandi Post & Tq.,

    Bagalkot District.

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

19.Appeal No.2186/2017

1. Mr Ahamed,
    S/o Mr Husainsab Choudari,

    Aged about 63 years,

    R/at Momin Galli

    Jamakhandi Post & Tq.,

    Bagalkot District

    (By Mr. Santhosh S Nagarale, Advocate)

 

 2. The Divisional Controller,
    NWKRTC Bagalkot Division,

    Divisional office,

    Navanagar, Bagalkot                                                  Respondents

    (By Mrs. Nirmala S Advocate)

 

: COMMON ORDER :

 

Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

 

1.       These Appeals are filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by the OP, aggrieved by the Common Order dated 17.08.2017 passed in Consumer Complaint Nos.87/2016 to 103/2016, 106/2016 and 107/2016 respectively on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bagalkot (for short, the District Forum). Since the facts and law involved in all these cases are one and the same, they have been taken up together for consideration

 

2.       Heard the arguments of the Learned Counsel for Appellant, Respondent Nos 1 & 2 in all the appeals except Respondent No.1 in Appeal No.2168/2017, 2169/2017 and 2170/2017 since inspite of service of Notice on Respondent No.1 in these appeals none appeared, hence their arguments have been taken as heard.

 

3.       The brief facts of the Complaints before the District Forum are that the complainants came to know that there are errors in calculation of their Pension fixed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner/OP1 and inspite of repeated requests and even for the Legal Notice issued to OP1, he did not comply with the demands made therein.   OP1 though contested the cases before the District Forum, neither filed his version nor Affidavit Evidence but orally submitted that they filed Appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission for transfer of these cases, to which Appellant has not produced any certified copies of the same. OP2 in his Version admitted that complainants were his Employees and during their employment, their contributions and all their necessary service particulars furnished to the OP1.  In view of rival contentions of the parties to the Complaints, the District Forum after enquiring into the matters,  allowed the Complaints partly and directed the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Raichur to re-calculate the pension payable to each of the Complainants by giving weightage of two years and also extend minimum assured benefits both in respect of past and present service with effect from the date of retirement of each of the Complainants, along with arrears of Pension, with interest @ 12% p.a.   Further directed to pay annual relief as per Para 32 of the EPS 1995 and Rs.2,000/- to each of the Complainants as cost of the litigation expenses and mental agony.  Further, the District Forum Dismissed the Complaint as against OP2/The Divisional Controller, NWKRTC, Bagalkot / The Managing Director, Godavari Sugar Mill Ltd., Bagalkot in CC No.93/2016.   Being aggrieved by this Order, OP1/Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner in these Appeals contended that he had filed detailed statement of objections by giving all the details and rightly fixed the Pension payable to the Complainants by granting weightage of two years and arrears of Pension have also been paid to the complainants, but, District Forum has erroneously come to the conclusion that there is deficiency in service and passed common orders in respect of all the Complaints and directed to re-calculate the pension by granting weightage of two years, interest and cost to the Complainants, which deserves to the set aside, as such, this Commission has  to examine whether such an Order is sustainable under law?

 

4.       Let us examine the details of service particulars of each of the Complainant on record, which are as hereunder:

Appeal No.	Complaint No.	Date of Birth	Date of joining	Date of retirement	Past service	Actual  service	Retirement age
2168/2017	87/2016	05.04.1949	01.06.1971	03.04.2007	24	11	58
2169/2017	88/2016	01.06.1950	01.06.1990	05.08.2004	05	07	55
2170/2017	89/2016	01.04.1951	01.06.1976	31.03.2009	19	13	58
2171/2017	90/2016	02.06.1950	01.06.1988	01.06.2008	07	13	58
2172/2017	91/2016	24.12.1941	01.06.1971	31.12.1999	24	04	58
2173/2017	92/2016	01.06.1952	01.06.1979	31.05.2010	15Y 10M	14	58
2174/2017	93/2016	01.06.1952	01.06.1980	31.05.2010	15	14	58
2175/2017	94/2016	12.05.1947	01.06.1971	31.05.2005	24	09	58
2176/2017	95/2016	16.09.1952	01.06.1976	15.09.2010	18Y 8M	14	58
2177/2017	96/2016	19.02.1939	01.06.1971	28.02.1997	24	01	58
2178/2017	97/2016	31.10.1951	01.06.1976	30.10.2009	19	14	58
2179/2017	98/2016	01.12.1952	01.06.1975	30.11.2010	20	15	58
2180/2017	99/2016	01.06.1952	01.06.1976	31.05.2010	18Y   9M	15	58
2181/2017	100/2016	01.01.1954	01.06.1982	31.12.2011	12Y   9M	16	58
2182/2017	101/2016	01.06.1948	01.06.1977	01.06.2006	18	10	58
2183/2017	102/2016	22.07.1954	01.06.1991	13.08.2009	04	11	56
2184/2017	103/2016	01.10.1948	01.06.1980	01.10.2006	15	11	58
2185/2017	106/2016	10.08.1952	01.06.1978	09.08.2010	16Y   7M	14Y   7M	58
2186/2017	107/2016	02.06.1952	01.06.1983	01.06.2010	11Y   9M	12	58

 

As per the contents of the above table and as per Para 10 (2) of EPS as it stood before 24.07.2009, the PF members are required to fulfil the condition of either attaining the age of 58 years or completion of pensionable service of 20 years, as on the date of retirement.   Thus, Complainants in Appeal Nos.2168, 2170 to 2172, 2175, 2177, 2182, 2184 of 2017 have retired from their service earlier to 24.07.2009, they are entitled for weightage of 2 years, since they have complied with the condition, as laid down in Para 10 (2) of EPS, as it stood before the amendment to 24.07.2009.

As per Para 10 (2) of EPS, as it stood after 24.07.2009, the PF members are required to fulfil the condition of attaining the age of 58 years and completion of pensionable service of 20 years, as on the date of retirement. Thus Complainants in Appeal Nos.2173, 2174, 2176, 2178 to 2181, 2185 and 2186/20017 have retired from their service after the amendment to 24.07.2009, they are entitled for weightage of 2 years, since they have complied with both the condition as laid down in Para 10 (2) of EPS, as it stood after the amendment to 24.07.2009.

Whereas Complainants in Appeal No.2169/2017 and 2183/2017 retired prior to attaining the age of 58 years and not rendered eligible service of 20 years and they have not complied with the condition of Para 10 (2) of EPS 1995, hence, they are not eligible for weightage of two of years.

5.       With regard to the eligibility of Monthly Pension, it is seen that the Complainants in Appeal No.2168, 2172, 2175, 2177, 2182 and 2184/2017 have retired before the amendment to 15.06.2007 of EPS 1995 and hence, their Monthly Pension will have to be re-calculated as per Para 12 of EPS 1995, as it stood before 15.06.2007. 

Similarly, Complainants in Appeal 2170, 2171, 2173, 2174, 2176, 2178, 2179, 2180, 2181, 2185 and 2186/2017 have retired after the amendment to 15.06.2007 of EPS 1995 and hence, their Monthly Pension will have to be re-calculated as per Para 12 of EPS 1995, as it stood after 15.06.2007.

Though Complainant in Appeal No.2169/2017 is not eligible for weightage of two years, but his Monthly Pension will have to be calculated as per Para 12 at it stood before to the amendment of 15.06.2007.  Likewise, Complainant in Appeal No. 2183/2017 is also not eligible for weightage of two years but his monthly pension will have to be calculated as per Para 12 at it stood after to the amendment of 15.06.2007.  If the Complainants have not been superannuated, the Appellant is honour bound to follow his own Rules & Regulations and should have subjected these Members to their entitlement for Reduced monthly Pension at reduction rate of 3% or 4% for every year of short fall in their service, as the age of the Members qualifying for benefits under the PF scheme, falls short of 58 years, as per Para 12.7 of EPS 1995.

 

6.       With regard to benefit under Para 32 of the Scheme i.e., Annual Relief, it is only Central Government which can grant such reliefs and not the OP1, as such the same cannot be granted by the OP1.

 

7.       It is not in dispute that the Complainant/Respondent in each of the case were employees of NWKRTC, Bagalkot Division and  Godavari Sugar Mill Ltd., Bagalkot and during their service they have joined the Employee Provident Fund Scheme, they contributed to the Employees Family Pension Scheme of 1971 and subsequently, they continued to contribute to the Employees Pension Scheme of 1995. It is pertinent to note here that, the Learned Counsel for Appellant submitted that they had granted two years of weightage, revised the Monthly Pension and paid the arrears to the Complainants, however to that effect they have not produced any cogent evidence and when they revised the Monthly Pension of the Complainants and paid the arrears.   In the circumstances, this Commission is of the considered opinion that the Impugned Order passed by the District Forum is just and proper.  However, we are of the considered opinion that awarding of interest @ 12% p.a is slightly on the higher side and reducing the same to 8.25% p.a would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, Appeals are allowed in part and consequently, the Impugned Common Order dated 17.08.2017 passed in Consumer Complaint Nos.87/2016 to 103/2016, 106/2016 and 107/2016 respectively on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bagalkot is hereby modified only to the extent of interest awarded by the District Forum is concerned.  The cost of Rs.2,000/- awarded to each of the complainant awarded by the District Forum shall also remain un-disturbed and the Appellant is directed to comply with this Order within 60 days from the date of this Order, if not already complied with.

8.       The statutory deposit in all these Appeals is directed to be transferred to the District Commission for further needful.

9.       Keep the Original of this Order in Appeal No.2168/2017 and copy thereof, in rest of the Appeals.

 

 

10.     Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission as well as to the parties concerned, immediately.

 

 

 

 

                                                         

                                                                          President

*s