PURAN SINGH Vs. PRABHANDHAK BHARATIYA STATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the complainant Pooran Singh, who is a pensioner and is resident of Gopalganj Sagar against the order dated 18.3.1999 passed in Case No.71/95 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sagar (for short the 'district Forum' ).

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the complainant is a retired railway employee. He was posted as Traffic Inspector in Western Railway at Ujjain from where he retired on 31.5.1985. On his retirement his pension was fixed at Rs.565/- and a PPO No. RTM/e/789/1/1247/4110 dated 24.5.1985 was issued. It was made clear in the PPO that the pension will be effective from 1.6.1985. This pension was revised and a revised PPO No. RTM/e/789/1/1247/4110 dated 2.9.1986 was issued in which basic pension was raised and fixed as Rs.893/-, additional pension Rs.63/- and personal pension Rs.98/- was sanctioned and it was directed that the dearness allowance shall be payable on the original pension and not on personal pension. Again this pension was recalculated at 50% of average emoluments in place of slab formula as per order of the Govt. of India 2/1/87 PIC-1 dated 16.4.1987 and a revised PPO No. RTM/e/769/1/1247/4110 dated 23.3.1994 was issued and the original pension of Rs.893/- was revised and was fixed to be Rs.960/-, additional pension to be added was Rs.67/- and Rs.98/- as personal pension. This sanctioned pension was to be paid by the State Bank of India, Ujjain vide letter No. PNB/mukhyalaya/w. R. /ratlam/7784 dated 12.6.1985, which was then transferred to State Bank of India, Civil Lines Branch, Sagar because after retirement complainant settled at Sagar.

(3.) The appellant was getting Rs.1,991/- per month upto April, 1995 but in the month of May, 1995 he was paid only Rs.1,491/-. On enquiry made by the complainant pensioner, the Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Civil Lines, Sagar vide letter No.4543 dated 13.5.1995 informed the pensioner that he had been paid an excess amount of Rs.19,813/- with effect from 1.1.1986 to 30.4.1995. This amount is to be deducted from the pension; therefore, the Bank is deducting Rs.500/- per month from his pension. Hence, Rs.1,491/- has been paid in the month of May, 1995. The complainant approached the Bank to examine his case properly because the railway had specifically made clear vide letter dated 5.5.1994 addressed to Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Civil Lines Sagar to make the payment of his revised pension at the rate of Rs.960/- plus additional pension of Rs.67/- plus personal pension of Rs.98/- and dearness allowance as admissible from time to time. But the Bank paid no heed to his request; therefore, he approached the District Forum, Sagar to seek redressal of his grievances. The District Forum after considering the evidence adduced by the parties ordered that the dispute is of complicated nature. Therefore, the complainant should approach the Civil Court or should seek redressal from the Railway Authorities and dismissed the complaint. It is against this order of the District Forum, that the complainant has preferred this appeal.