JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER Vs. KESAR LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is a Welfare Board in the State of Rajasthan and runs a scheme of financial assistance to workers for their daughter's marriage. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent complainant applied for financial assistance under the scheme and his application was rejected on the ground that the application was not submitted before 90 days from the date of marriage as per provisions of the said scheme. It was further stated that against the rejection order, there is a provision in the scheme to file an appeal before the Secretary of the Welfare Board, however, that facility was not availed and a consumer complaint was filed before the District Forum being CC No.545/2014. The petitioner has taken an objection that the complainant is not a Consumer and District Forum dismissed the complaint by its order dated 06.10.2016. The complainant has preferred an appeal being FA No.1497 of 2016 and the State Commission has allowed the appeal vide its order dated 20.08.2019. Hence the present revision petition.

(2.) Learned counsel stated that if the application is not filed in time, the same has to be rejected by the Board. There is a provision that an appeal can be filed before the secretary of the Board, but no appeal was filed. Definitely, the complainant is not a consumer as per the provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. A sum of Rs.60/- has been paid under the scheme as fees for the identity card under the scheme and hence no consideration has been paid for availing the financial assistance and moreover the Welfare Board is not a service provider.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at the admission stage. It is seen that the State Commission has allowed the complaint and has directed the petitioner to pay Rs.51,000/- as per the provision of the scheme for financial assistance and has awarded Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/-. For these amounts, the State Commission has awarded 18% p.a. interest also from the date of filing of the complaint. It is seen from the record and the same has been verified by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no communication was sent to the complainant by the petitioner before rejecting the application advising him to file the application for condonation of delay or to explain the reason for delay.