J.D.KAPOOR, MAHESH CHANDRA, RUMNITA MITTAL
ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER – Appellant
Versus
MOHD. UMAR – Respondent
Mr. Justice J.D. Kapoor, President—The appellant is respository of the Provident Fund of the employees of private organizations under Provident Fund Scheme. Vide impugned order dated 7.10.2001 passed by the District Forum it has been directed to pay Rs. 1,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment the respondent-employee suffered by not receiving the amount of the provident fund for more than 2 years. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has directed this appeal by taking the resort to provisions of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 in support of his contention that there was no delay in disbursing the amount and the appellant is not deficient in service and consequently is not liable to pay the awarded amount. The relevant Clause 10.19 is reproduced as under:
“10.19 The Central Board of Trustees at its 100th Meeting have approved the following procedures with regard to the attestation of claim forms for settlement of accounts under the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.
(i) Where the claim is preferred by a member with attestation of the authorised official, other than his ex-employer within one year of the claim becoming due, irrespective of the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.