KATEPALLY GANGAVVA Vs. BRANCH MANAGER SHIV SAGAR BEEDI WORKS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the unsuccessful complainant in CD 144/2004 before the District Forum, Nizamabad, where under the complainant filed against the OP claiming pensionary benefits under PF Act was dismissed . Questioning the legality and propriety of the order this appeal is filed to direct the respondent to pay the pensionary benefits under PF scheme.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant was a Beedi worker and used to work under the OP1 branch. The complainant is an illiterate so she used to attend to beedi rolling work and she worked from May, 93 to August, 2000. On attaining the age of 58 years, and on the compulsion of OP 1 ceasing her membership she resigned the job of beedi rolling worker. During her employment she was allotted PF No. AP/17070/22297 by the PF authorities. As per rules, in case, the worker completes 58 years the worker is eligible for pension. At the time of submitting the papers opting for the pension scheme, the OP 1 with a malafide intention to deprive pensionary benefits to the complainant had showed her date of birth as 01.05.1973 instead of 1.5.1943. The pass book issued by the OP 1 shows the date of birth mentioned as 1943. On the basis of the wrong information given by OP 1 with regard to her age, the OP 2 has issued claim certificate No. NBSC/12268/50, dt.21.12.2000 showing the eligibility of pension as on 1.5.2031. Instead of eligibility of pension in the year 2001 it is shown as 2031 which was due to gross negligence and it amounts to deficiency on the part of OP 1. The complainant had approached OP 2 requesting to change wrong date of birth in the certificate and thereafter got issued a legal notice . PF authority asked her to produce original birth certificate issued by the Births and Deaths Registrar or to produce school certificates. Being an illiterate and not admitted in any school she could not produce the certificates as required. While issuing pass book by OP 1 showing her age OP 2 ought to have verified the correct age but failed to do so. The act or omission on the part of OPs 1 and 2 amounts to deficiency in service. So they may be directed to pay pension at Rs.465/- for 20 years which comes to Rs.1,11,600/-, funeral expenses of Rs.20,000/- compensation for mental agony Rs.25,000/- and miscellaneous of Rs.2000/- in total Rs.1,58,600/- and costs.

(3.) While taking the case on file, the case against the OP 2 was rejected vide order 16.12.2004 .