CC No.80/2023

10-08-2023

ORDER ON ADMISSION

BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The complainant filed this complaint against the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 4 alleging deficiency in service in paying pension without obtaining the life certificate for a period from April-2018 to July-2018 and submits that he was employee of Defence Department and he had given resignation on 4-7-2014. There afterward he received a direction to submit a fresh application from the department, accordingly he withdrawn the voluntary retirement, but the Defence Department persuaded the complainant’s resignation without voluntary retirement application. This complainant challenged the said matter before the Central Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru bench in OA No.888/2015 and the same was withdrawn by the complainant and again filed AO No.20/2017 the said AO was dismissed due to lack of merits. There afterward he preferred appeal before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in WP No.22620/2019 and the same was dismissed on 16-3-2021 as there is no merit. Subsequently the complainant again preferred Special Leave Appeal in SLP No.12485/2022, the said appeal also dismissed on 25-7-2022. 

2. The Defence Department was imposed voluntary retirement by mentioning that they have used photocopy of the complainant’s application in their reply statement. Basing on that the said petitions filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and Central Administrative Tribunal were dismissed. There afterwards the Opposite Party has credited a pension in the account of complainant unauthorizedly. The Opposite Party also not demanded for production of life certificate from the complainant, hence he sought for information under RTI Act as per application dated 22.6.2021, but the Opposite Party has not replied to the said application hence they have rendered a deficiency in service. Without providing life certification, the Opposite Party bank has made illegal misappropriation in pension from April-2018 to July-218, but the complainant had not received any pension since retirement. Due to non supply of the documents sought by the complainant, the Opposite Party rendered deficiency in service, hence prays for payment of compensation to the tune of Rs. 78,29,736/-  

                3. Heard on admission.

4. On perusal of pleadings, it is noticed that the complainant alleged deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party for not paying the pension since from retirement and also noticing the misappropriation of the pension for a period from April -2018 to July 2018 and he also alleged that he filed an application under RTI for information from the Opposite Party, but the Opposite Party has not replied to the said application, hence alleged deficiency in service and claim for compensation. The subject matter which alleged in the pleadings are not fall within the provision of Consumer Protection Act, if at all the complainant is not satisfied with the information given by the Opposite Party upon the application under RTI, he has to prefer the appeal before the RTI authority and not before this Commission alleging deficiency in service, we do not find any reasons to admit the complaint, as such the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:- 

O R D E R

The complaint is dismissed as not maintainable. 

The office is directed to return the complaint along with documents to the complainant with liberty to file the same before the appropriate authority.  

Send a copy of this order to both parties.

Lady Member                                    Judicial Member

Jrk/-