UTTARANCHAL PAYJAL SANSTHAN Vs. NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this is an appeal against the order dated 11.7.2003 passed by the District Forum, Rudraprayag whereby the complaint of the complainant was allowed.

(2.) In this appeal the only allegation was that the complainant is not a consumer and the non-payment of pension, provident fund, gratuity and life insurance is not a consumer dispute. It is true and we are supported by the rulings , Controller and Auditor General of India V/s. Sheo Kant Shanker Naik., 2003 1 CPJ 276 In this ruling, it has been held that the Accountant General does not provide or render any service. It was further held in this ruling that where there is any dispute regarding service conditions, that are to be adjudicated by services and administrative Tribunals and by Consumer Forums. The same view has been upheld in the ruling , Shaila Mukherjee V/s. Kashi Vidyopitti., 2003 4 CPJ 136

(3.) Since the dispute did not lie before the learned Forum, the judgment given by the learned Forum is without jurisdiction and shall be deemed to be not existing in the eyes of law.