Date of Filing :30.05.2016

                                                            Date of Disposal : 18.01.2023

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

DATED:18.01.2023

PRESENT

HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

Mrs DIVYASHREE M: LADY MEMBER

APPEAL Nos.1185/2016 to 1205/2016

The Assistant Provident Fund
Commissioner
Sub Regional Office 2^nd Floor
Garaladinni Complex
Saath Kacheri Road
Raichur 584101                                                            Appellant

(By Mrs Nandita Haldipur, Advocate

(Appellant is same in all the Appeals)

-Versus-

1. Appeal No.1185/2016

1.  Mr Basavaraj
     S/o Mr SiddayyaSopinamath
     Age: 69 years,
     R/o Jantha Colony Huligudda,
     Lingasugur, Tq Lingasugur
     Distric Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC, Raichur Division
     Divisional Office, Raichur
     (By Mr B.K.Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                               Respondents

2. Appeal No.1186/2016

  1. Mr Veerabhadrappa
     S/o Mr Sarabanna
     Age: 68 years,
     R/o. Kasba Lingasugur
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC, Raichur Division
     Divisional Office, Raichur                                                           

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

     Mr Shivayogesha

     Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                                Respondents

3. Appeal No.1187/2016

1.  Mr Jabardastkhan
     S/o Mr Yassin Khan
     Age: 61 years,
     R/o. C/o Jakabdabatta Farma,
     Mudgal, Tq Lingasugur,
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office, Raichur                      

     (By Mr B K Patil, Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                           Respondents

4. Appeal No.1188/2016

1.  Mr Bashateppa
     S/o Mr Siddappa Yaligar
     Age:  64 years
     Occ: Retired KSRTC Employee
     R/o. Kasaba Lingasugur
     Tq. Lingasugur
     District Raichur

2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     Raichur                                                

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                           Respondents

5. Appeal No.1189/2016

1.  Mr Tirumalarao
     S/o Mr Vamanarao
     Age: 65 years,
     R/o. Anneshosoor,
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office, Raichur
     Raichur                                                                   

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                               Respondents

6. Appeal No.1190/2016                                   

1.  Mr Shaikh Maheboob
     S/o Mr Nazeer Ahmed
     Age: 65 years,
     R/o H. No. A-13/9, Gandhi Maidana
     Hutti Gold Mines Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The General Managar
     Hutti Gold Mines Co Ltd
     Hutti, Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur                                                                 
     (By Mr B K Patil

      Advocate for R1

      Mr M.R.C Ravi, Advocate for R2)                              Respondents

7. Appeal No.1191/2016                                   

1.  Mr Rudrappa
     S/o Mr Veerabhadrappa
     Age: 64 years,
     R/o :Lingasugur,
     Tq Lingasugur
     District  Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     Raichur                                                                          

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                               Respondents

8. Appeal No.1192/2016

1.  Mr Amareshappa
     S/o Channappa Desai
     Age: 70 years,
     R/o : Veerapur,
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     Raichur                                                

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                              Respondents

9. Appeal No.1193/2016

1.   Mr Topanna
     S/o Mr Gurappa Mokashi
     Age: 65 years,
     R/o. Ameengad,
     Tq Hunagund
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     Raichur                                                                    

     (By Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                                Respondents

10. Appeal No.1194/2016

 1. Mr Shivayya
     S/o Mr Veerabhadrayya
     Age: 66 years,
     R/o : New Bus Stand Lingasugur,
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     Raichur, District Raichur                                                            

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

     Shivayoginath, Advocate  for R2)                            Respondents

11. Appeal No.1195/2016

1.  Mr Veerupakshappa
     S/o Mr Mallappa Kosagi
     Age: 62 years,
     R/o :Maski, Kubgasugur,
     Tq Lingasugur,
     District Raichur

2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     District Raichur       

     (By Mr B K Patil  Advocate for R1 &

     Mr Shivayogesha Shivayoginath

     Advocate for R2)                                                        Respondents

12. Appeal No.1196/2016                       

1.  Mr Somashekharappa
     S/o Mr Nagaradeppa Achha
     Age: 62 years,
     R/o Maskim Lingasugur Tq
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office, Raichur
     Dist Raichur                                                            

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath, Advocate for R2)                              Respondents

13. Appeal No.1197/2016             

1.  Mr Pamayya
     S/o Mr Sidramayya
     Age: 62 years,
     R/o Hasamakal Gudadur
     Tq Sindhanoor
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office, Raichur                                                            

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

     Mr Shivayogesha

     Shivayoginath, Advocate for R2)                               Respondents

14. Appeal No.1198/2016

1.  Miss P Dally
     D/o Mr Ponnuswami
     Age: 66 years,
     R/o.H.No A-7/3, Gandhi Nagar
     Hutti Gold Mines,
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The General Managar
     Hutti Gold Mines Co Ltd
     Hutti Tq. Lingasugur
     District Raichur                                                                 

     (By Mr M R C Ravi 

      Advocate for R2)                                                       Respondents

15. Appeal No.1199/2016

1. Mr Basangouda
    S/o Amaregouda
    Age: 65 years,
    R/o :Lingasugur,
    Tq Lingasugur
    District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,
     Raichur                                                                    

     (By Mr B.K.Patil Advocate for R1 &

     Mr Shivayogesha

     Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                                Respondents

16. Appeal No.1200/2016

1. Mr Basavantappa
    S/o Berojappa
    Age: 65 years,
    R/o :Halapur,
    Tq Manavi
    District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,

     Raichur                                                                    

     (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                               Respondents

17. Appeal No.1201/2016

1.  Mr Veerabhadrayya
     S/o Mr Sidramayya
     Age: 63 years,
     R/o Hasamkal Gudadur
     Tq Sindhanoor
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Divisional Controller
     NEKRTC Raichur Division
     Divisional Office,

      District Raichur                                                                

      (By Mr B K Patil Advocate for R1 &

      Mr Shivayogesha

      Shivayoginath Advocate for R2)                               Respondents

18. Appeal No.1202/2016             

1.  Mr Bhimaiah Narayanappa
     Age: 62 years,
     R/o C/o Satyanarayan Bijapur
     Mirji Galli Near Balulmath
     Bagalkot
     District Bagalkot
     
2.  The Secretary
     Hutti Gold Mines Co Ltd
     HuttiTq, Lingasugur
     District Raichur                                                                 
     (By Mr B K Patil

     Advocate for R1)                                                        Respondents

19. Appeal No.1203/2016

1.  Mr Advirao
     S/o Mr Madhavrao Konnapur
     Age: 66 years,
     R/o. Plot No. 502,

     Divygiri Nilaya
     2^nd Cross, Saptagiri Badawane,
     Faddanakeri,
     District Raichur
     
2.  The Secretary
     Hutti Gold Mines Co Ltd
     Hutti Tq, Lingasugur
     Dist Raichur                                                    Respondents

     (By Mr B K Patil

     Advocate for R1)

20. Appeal No.1204/2016

1.  Mr Maheboob

     S/o Mr Mohammed Gouse
     Age: 73 years,
     R/o : Kakanagar
     Hutti Gold Mines,
     Tq Lingasugur
     District Raichur
     
2.  The General Managar
     Hutti Gold Mines Co Ltd
     Hutti Tq, Lingasugur
     District Raichur                                                        Respondents

     (By Mr M R C Ravi 

      Advocate for R2)

21. Appeal No.1205/2016

1.  Mr Srinivas Narayan Rao
     S/o Mr Narayan Rao
     Age:66 years
     R/o Saptagiri Badawane
     Gaddanakeri Tq
     District Bagalkot

2.  The Secretary
     Hutti Gold Mines Co Ltd
     Hutti Tq, Lingasugur
     District Raichur                                                        Respondents
 

:COMMON ORDER:

Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

1.       These Appeals are filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by OP, aggrieved by the Common Order dated 29.04.2016 passed in Complaint Nos.37/2014, 38/2014, 40/2014, 41/2014, 42/2014, 43/2014, 44/2014, 47/2014, 48/2014, 49/2014, 50/2014, 51/2014, 52/2014, 53/2014, 54/2014, 59/2014, 60/2014, 61/2014, 62/2014, 63/2014 and 64/2014 respectively on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raichur (for short, the District Forum).Since the facts and law involved in all these are one and the same, they have been taken up together for consideration.

2.       Perused the Impugned Order, grounds of Appeal and heard the arguments of the learned counsel of Appellant and Respondents in Appeal Nos.1185/2016 to 1191/2016, 1192/2016, 1194/2016 to 1197/2016, 1199/2016 to 1201/2016. 

It is observed that status of service of notice from this Commission to other Respondents is as hereunder

1. Appeal No.1202/2016 and 1203/2016 inspite of notice having been duly served on R2, he remains absent. 
2. Appeal No.1205/2016 inspite of notice having been duly served  on both Respondents, they remains absent

Further;

1. Appeal No.1193/2016 notice on R1 has been returned with postal endorsement ‘insufficient address’ .
2. Appeal No.1198/2016, notice on R1 has not been returned with any postal endorsement. 
3. Appeal No.1204/2016 notice on R1 has been returned with postal endorsement ‘insufficient address’.

In as much as no steps have been taken by the Appellant in the above three cases, taking into consideration, the vintage of the case and the age of the Respondents, as a special case, the service of notice in the above cases has been dispensed with to avoid further delay.

3.       The grievance of the Complainants/Respondents before the District Forum in their respective Complaints are that, OP while fixing their pension, has not considered their past and present service for adding weightage of 2 years, hence they sought re-fixation of their Monthly Pension with arrears of pension amount, interest and cost of the litigation.

4.       The stand taken by the OP during the course of arguments is that they have granted two years of weightage, revised the pension of the pensioners and paid the arrears also.

5.       The District Forum after enquiring into the matter with submission of the learned counsel for OP and also by considering the age of complainants, inconvenience caused by OP to them over all these years, deemed it fit to allow the Complaints in part and directed the OP to refix the pension amount by adding weightage of 2 years and extend the 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 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date it fell due with Compensation of Rs.5,000/- each to all the Complainants for pain, sufferings and litigation charges.  Failing which, the balance pension amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a from the date of commencement of pension till its realisation. Further District Forum directed the OP to pay annual reliefs to the Complainants as per Para 32 of EPS along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum.

6.       Feeling aggrieved by this Order, OP is in Appeal inter-alia contending amongst other grounds, that District Forum does not have jurisdiction to interpret any Rule/Law regarding payment of pension to the respective Complainants / Respondents herein and the direction for calculation of Pension, by taking minimum pension for past service being interpretation of the Employees Pension Scheme, cannot be held to be deficiency in service. District Forum erroneously directed payment of annual relief; failed to note that the weightage has been given, after receipt of Head Office Circular after amendment to the Act and failed to note that there is no minimum past service benefit to be provided under the Scheme, the minimum pension is provided only for the aggregate of past and pensionable service pension. Thus seeks to set aside the Impugned Order by Dismissing the Complaints.

          The Learned counsel for the Appellant also furnished a Memo with copies of Pension Payment Orders, reflecting therein that they have made the payment of arrears to the Complainants/Respondents and revised their entitled Pension.

7.       It is not in dispute that Complainants/Respondents in each of the case were employees of Hutti Gold Mines Co. Ltd., Hutti and the Divisional Controller, NEKRTC Raichur Division in different posts and during their tenure of employment, they joined the Employee PF Scheme; contributed to the Employees Family Pension Scheme of 1971 and subsequently, continued to contribute to the Employees Pension Scheme of 1995.It is also not in dispute that Appellant by adding weightage of 2 years, revised the Pension of the Complainants/Respondents.   On perusal of the Pension Payment Orders produced by the Appellant, it is observed that they paid the arrears of Pension amounts during the pendency of the cases, in the year 2016 belatedly and that too after the Complainants raising their grievances and in our considered opinion, certainly this act of Appellant amounts to deficiency in service. 

8.       With regard to the contention of the Complainants/ Respondents, with regard to benefit under Para 32 of the scheme i.e., Annual Relief, it is seen that the relevant provision, reads as hereunder:

        “32. Valuation of the Employees’ Pension Fund and review of the rates of contributions and quantum of the pension and other benefits – (1) The Central Government shall have an annual valuation of the Employees Pension Fund made by a valuer appointed by it;

        Provided that it shall be open to the Central Government to direct a valuation to be made at such other times as it may consider necessary

2) at any time, when the Employees’ Pension Fund so permits, the Central Government may alter the rate of contributions payable under this Scheme or the scale of any benefit admissible under this Scheme or the period for which such benefit may be given”.

           Thus, by reading the said provisions, it is seen that it is only Central Government which can grant such reliefs and not the OP and hence, he cannot grant the same.

In such circumstances, this Commission is of the considered opinion that awarding interest at the rate of 8% p.a on arrears of Pension and consolidated compensation of Rs.5,000/- each to all the Complainants for the pain & sufferings undergone litigation charges is just and proper and the same does not call for any interference. Accordingly, Appeal stands Dismissed.

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

10.     Keep the Original of this Order in Appeal No.1185/2016 and copy thereof, in rest of the Appeals.

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

                                                                        President

                                                                      Lady Member

*s