D. CHANDRA REDDY Vs. SECRETARY, PROVIDENT FUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant is the appellant. The complainant challenges by way of filing the appeal that he can question the computation of the Provident Fund Amount after a period of fifteen years. The loan amount and its deduction from the salary of the appellant during the period while he was in service have been questioned by assailing the impugned order.

(2.) The facts leading to filing of the appeal as represented by the complainant are that the complainant was working with the opposite parties no.2 and 3 as conductor and retired from the service as Traffic Inspector on 30th April, 2006. The complainants provident fund account bearing number AP.HYD 000295/03944 came into operation with effect from the year of 1971. The contribution to the provident fund account of the complainant was from the complainant and his employer, the opposite party no.2 in equal proportion. During the period from 1978 to 1988 the amount in Depots at Nalgonda and Suryapeta was misappropriated and from the financial year of 1988-89 there was minus balance in the account of the complainant whereby the complainant filed complaint C.D.No. 204 of 1991 before the District Forum, Nalgonda whereof the District Forum directed the opposite party no.1 to reconcile the statement of account of the complainant in accordance of the entries of the pass book issued by them in favour of the complainant.

(3.) The opposite party no.1 said to have postponed reconciling the statement of account of the complainant on the pretext of introduction of the computerization of the accounts and later they had informed the complainant that his account would be settled at the time of his retirement from the service which they had not done by making payment of a sum of Rs.2, 85,443/- at the time of his retirement instead of paying an amount of Rs.4, 85,443/-. The complainant after receiving the amount of Rs.2,85,443/- under protest and requested by addressing letter dated 8-05-2006 and notice dated 28-05-2006 for payment of the balance amount. There was no response for his claim from the opposite parties, the complainant has filed the complaint which is the genesis of the impugned order.