
View 8734 Cases Against Provident Fund
View 8734 Cases Against Provident Fund
M M Hussain filed a consumer case on 23 Mar 2023 against The Asst Provident Fund Commissioner in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is A/771/2021 and the judgment uploaded on 01 Apr 2023.
Date of Filing : 01.10.2021
Date of Disposal : 23.03.2023
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED : 23.03.2023
PRESENT
APPEAL No.771/2021
Mr M M Hussain
Aged about 82 years
(Retd. Driver of KSRTC)
Residing at Door No.5/883
15th Cross, BB Road
P H Colony
Tumkuru City Appellant
(By Mr T Ramaiah, Advocate)
1. The Asst Provident Fund Commissioner
Sub-Regional Office
Peenya, Bengaluru - 560 058
2. The Divisional Controller (D.C.)
K S R T C
Ashoka Road
Tumakuru City Respondent
(By Mrs M R Shalamala, Advocate)
: ORDER :
Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT
1. This is an Appeal filed under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 by Complainant aggrieved by the Order dated 28.07.2021 passed in Complaint No.60/2019 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tumakuru (for short, the District Forum).
2. Perused the Impugned Order, grounds of Appeal and heard the Arguments of the Learned Counsels for Appellant and Respondent.
3. On Perusal of the records it reveals that the District Forum after enquiring into the matter, Dismissed the Complaint as barred by limitation, which is impugned in this Appeal by the Complainant seeking to set aside the Impugned Order and with a direction to the Respondent - The Asst Provident Fund Commissioner to pay Annual relief. Further contends that the Complaint is filed in time from the date of knowledge that there is error in fixing of Monthly Pension, but District Forum failed to consider the same and failed to give sufficient opportunity to put forth his case.
4. Per contra, the Respondent contended that the Monthly Pension was fixed by adding two years weightage which is in order and further submitted that there is no Government Notification with regard to release of annual relief, as such annual arrears has not been released.
5. Thus the submission of the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 be accepted since there is no Government Notification for release of annual relief as such, same has not been paid. In this regard, it is clear that the benefit under Para 32 of the Scheme i.e., Annual Relief, it is only Central Government which can grant such reliefs and not the OP, as such the same cannot be granted by the OP. Further the contention of the Appellant that from the date of his knowledge that there is error in fixing the monthly pension, he had filed the Complaint before the District Forum. On the other hand Respondent had filed calculation sheet stating that they revised the monthly pension of the complainant by adding two years weightage which is in order. In the circumstances, the delay in filing the Complaint an opportunity be given to the complainant to prove the same. In the circumstances, the Impugned Order requires to be interfered with by remanding the case to the District Commission to consider the case afresh on merits, by giving an opportunity to the both the parties and dispose off the same, in accordance with Law. Accordingly, Appeal is allowed, impugned Order dated 28.07.2021 passed in Complaint No.60/2019 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tumakuru is hereby set aside and matter is remanded to the District Commission to decide the case afresh and dispose of the matter on merit in accordance with law within 3 months from the date of the order.
6. Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission as well as to the parties concerned, immediately.
President
*s
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.