REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs. DINANATH RAJPUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , is directed against the order dated 10.11.2006 in Complaint No.282/2006 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (hereinafter called the 'district Forum' for short), directing the appellant to pay to the complainant/respondent No.1, family pension with interest @ 6% p. a. payable from 31.12.1986, besides compensation of Rs.5,000 for mental harassment. Rs.500 as cost of the complaint was also awarded, as against the appellant.

(2.) The relevant averments of the complainant/respondent No.1 stated in brief are that he was an employee of respondent No.2-Bhilai Steel Plant and retired on 31.12.1986, after about 15 years. It was averred that deduction of Rs.17 per month were made from his salary towards 'provident Fund monthly pension account', amounting to Rs.2,00,000 which he was entitled to. However, since the grievance of the complainant was not settled and the amount was not paid to him, he approached the District Forum.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the appellant 'employees Provident Fund Commissioner'. It was stated that the form submitted by the complainant for payment of family pension was forwarded to Regional Office of the Provident Fund Commissioner, Raipur. It was further averred that so far as Employee's Provident Fund amount is concerned, an amount of Rs.23,664 was paid to the complainant vide voucher No.1445 dated 9.2.1987. No other amount was liable to be paid to him. It was further averred that Family Pension Scheme, 1971 did not entitle the employee to receive family pension and further that Family Pension Scheme, 1995 was applicable from 16.11.1995 the benefit of which cannot be given to the complainant, in view of the fact, that he retired much earlier, on 31.12.1986.