Karnataka

StateCommission

A/2607/2016

The Regional Provident FundCommissioner - Complainant(s)

Versus

S.A. Chidanandaiah - Opp.Party(s)

Sandya Jamadagni

09 Aug 2023

ORDER

Date of Filing : 29.09.2016

Date of Disposal :09.08.2023

 

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

 

DATED:09.08.2023

 

PRESENT

 

HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

 

 

APPEAL No.2607/2016

 

 

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Regional Office

Peenya

Bengaluru-560 022                                                       Appellant

(By Mrs Sandhya Jamadagni, Advocate)

 

 

-Versus-

 

Mr S A Chidanandaiah

S/o Late Adimurthappa

Aged 60 years

R/o No.151, 2^nd Cross

Dr Shivram Karanth Nagar

Shiradi Sai Rathan Layout

Bengaluru-560 077                                                        Respondent

         

:ORDER:

 

Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

 

1.       This is an Appeal filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, by OP aggrieved by the Order dated 27.04.2016 passed in Complaint No.2755/2013 on the file of II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bangalore (for short, the District Forum).

 

2.       Heard the arguments of the Learned Counsel for Appellant.  Inspite of due service of Notice on the Respondent from this Commission for his appearance, none represented in the matter, obviously taking into consideration the age of the Respondent/ Complainant, besides financial & physical inconvenience that are to be encountered for a paltry sum and hence, his arguments is taken as heard.

3.       The District Forum after enquiring into the matter, allowed the Complaint in part with a direction to OP, to re-fix the pension of the Complainant, as per Rule 10(2) read with Rule 12(4) of Employees Provident Scheme of 1995 from the date of his Retirement, by giving weightage of two years and to pay the arrears of pension amount and cost of Rs.2,000/- to the Complainant within 60 days from the date of receipt of the Order.

 

4.       Aggrieved by this Order, OP is in Appeal, seeking to set aside the Impugned Order passed by the District Forum.

5.       Perused the impugned order and Grounds of Appeal.   The allegation of the Complainant is that, inspite of giving representation to the OP for grant of weightage of two years and re-fixation of the entitled monthly Pension, but, the OP has not revised his Pension, he lodged the instant Complaint.   In his Version, OP has taken a contention that the Compliant is not at all maintainable either in Law or on facts of the case.  The Complainant is not eligible to get weightage of two years, as per Para 10(2) of EPS 1995.

6.       With regard to giving of weightage of two years, in the Memorandum of Appeal at Paragraph No.6 therein it is specifically contented by the Appellant that the Respondent has retired after the amendment to Para 10(2) of EPS w.e.f 24.07.2009 and that the Complainant has to fulfil both the conditions of said Para.   He has not put in pensionable service of 20 years and hence, he is not eligible for weightage of two years.

7.       The Complainant was the member of Employees Provident Fund Organisation; contributed his contribution to the Employees Family Pension Scheme of 1971; continued to contribute subsequently to the Employees Pension Scheme of 1995 also; he retired from the services of his Employer on 19.04.2011 on attaining the age of superannuation by rendering past service of 16 years 6 months 15 days and pensionable service of 15 years 5 months 4 days.  Thus Complainant has fulfilled both the conditions of the amendment to Para 10(2) of EPS as it stood after 24.07.2009 and accordingly, he is eligible for weightage of two years.  Further, the entitled Monthly Pension of the Complainant will have to be re-calculated as per Para 12 of EPS 1995, as it stood after 15.06.2007, since the Complainant retired on 19.04.2011.  In the circumstances, the Impugned Order is just and proper and same doesn’t call for any interference.   Accordingly, the Appeal stands Dismissed, with no order as to costs.

 

8.       The Statutory Deposit in this Appeal is directed to be transferred to the District Commission for further needful.

 

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

 

                                                                      President

*s