Learned Counsel for the Appellant is present. 

 

In spite of notice dt.16-03-2022 of this Commission, Neither the Respondent nor his Counsel present to-day. 

 

This appeal is of the year 2007.

 

The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is an unmarried daughter of D.R.Ramulu Naidu who was an employee of Railways working as Loco Diesel Driver and retires from service on 31-05-1983. He died on 29-05-1988, after his death her mother Narasama was getting family pension under PPO No. PEN/WAT/2062 through SBI, Rayagada vide Saving  Bank Account No. 01190008241. Her mother expired on 12-06-2003. After her death the Complainant claims life long family pension on the ground that she is unmarried and handicap and entitle to get such benefit as per circular No. 166/1988 issued by the Railways.  

 

On receipt of notice the Opposite parties filed version denying the allegations of the complainant stated that her case was recommended to Railway Board for consideration and there is no delay counsel by them and there is no deficiency in service on their part.

After hearing the case learned Forum below allowed the complaint of the Complainant, holding that the Complainant is entitled to the   life long family pension w.e.f. 01-06-2003 and directed the Opposite Parties to finalize the same.

Challenging the above order the present appeal has been filed by the Appellant, Counsel of the Appellant submitted that the claim of the Complainant is not maintainable under the C.P.Act. The Forum below has illegally passed the impugned order which is liable to be set aside.

 

We have perused the Complaint petition of the Complainant and written version of the Opposite Parties.

 

On perusal of materials available on record we found that the complaint petition is relating to family pension, which is not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act. Hence we set aside the order of the learned Dist. Forum, Rayagada and allowed the Appeal.

 

No costs.

 

DFR be sent back.