SURESH KUMAR GUPTA Vs. GULAB DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-respondent (an official of the P. N. B. Branch Office, Madhubani), against the order dated 5.11.1998 passed by the District Forum, Madhubani in Consumer Case No.128/1998.1. The brief fact of the case is that the respondent-complainant filed a complaint case before the District Forum, Madhubani on 1.9.1998 against the appellant and other officials of the P. N. B. vide Consumer Case No.128/1998. The contention of the complainant was that she was widow of late Krishnadeo Singh, a freedom fighter. During the pendency of his claim for pension he died on 14.8.1997 whereafter the respondent-complainant was substituted in the place of her husband. After due verification by Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the claim of freedom fighter's pension was cleared and Ministry of Finance, Government of India sent all the documents including P. P. O. No. MHAFF 980/2003 dated 17.4.1998 to the appellant with the direction to credit the arrears of pension as well as current pension in the respondent's (complainant's) Account No.11756. The allegation of the complainant-respondent is that in spite of this direction, the appellant-O. P. did not credit the amount in her account and also alleged that appellant made a demand of illegal gratification for such payment. She served Pleader's notice twice to the appellant but to no effect and thereafter she filed the complaint case.

(2.) The appellant-Bank appeared, filed written statement pleading therein the P. P. O. of the complainant mentioned above was received in the Branch Office of the Bank in the last week of April 1998. The complainant's P. P. O. was signed by the Asstt. Accounts Officer, Ministry of Finance and his signature was attested by the Senior Accounts Officer of the Finance Ministry. After scrutiny of the file, the specimen signature of the above two Accounts Officers were not available in the Bank. Thereafter O. P. No.1 wrote two letters dated 13.5.1998 and 29.5.1998 addressed to the Senior Accounts Officer of the Finance Ministry to send attested copies of the specimen signature of both Sri K. K. Bhatti and Sh. D. S. Dhahia, Assistant Accounts Officer and Senior Accounts Officer and to confirm the payment of the arrears of pension to the complainant. When no reply was received, O. P. No.1 also sent fax message. As per rule vide Annexure-12 the link branch is to satisfy the genuineness of pension papers by tallying the signatures of the authorised signatories with those already on their record and will keep record of all the P. P. O. 's in the Index Register branch-wise and it shall be forwarded to the concerned paying branch. Under this provision the O. P. No.1 took steps to ascertain the genuineness of the signatures of the above named officers. This made delay in the payment of the pension to the complainant. Therefore, the allegation of the complainant of demanding illegal gratification and purposeful delay in the payment are false and baseless.

(3.) The complainant has produced before the District Forum letter dated 7.4.1998 of Ministry of Finance, letter of P. A. O/p and M dated 3.3.1998 of Pay and Accounts Office, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and the copy of the legal notices sent to the appellant in support of her contention. The appellant had produced the documents, namely photostat copy of letter No. CPA dated Nil 1998 of Senior Accounts Officer, Ministry of Finance containing specimen signature of D. S. Dhahia, Accounts Officer and photostat copy of letter dated 13.5.1998 of Sri S. N. Trikha, Senior Pay and Accounts Officer and some other letters addressed to the Ministry of Finance and the letter received to the Madhubani Branch, the details of which are mentioned in the impugned order.