ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II U.T. CHANDIGARH

Omesh Garg son of Sh.Pirt Paul Garg, aged about 44 years, r/o House No.5604, Sector 38, West, Chandigarh.

... Complainant V E R S U S Employees Provident Fund Organization (Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India), Regional Office, Cantonment Board Building, Golibar Maidan, Pune-411011 through its Commissioner.…. Opposite Party

BEFORE:

SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU PRESIDENT

SHRI B.M. SHARMA MEMBER

ARGUED BY:

Sh.Devinder Kumar, Counsel for complainant

None for OP

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1. Complainant has filed the present consumer complaint pleadingthat he was working with M/s Tech Mahindra, Pune and was having EPF a/cNo.MH/PUN/ 34224/16179 (hereinafter referred to as “old PF account” ) and on 27.2.2009 he left the said job. On 19.7.2010, complainant was appointed by M/s Infosys Limited and is having EPF a/c No.PY/BOM/10088/151798 (hereinafter referred to as “current PF account” ). In September 2010, complainant submitted EPF transfer application with the OP through his current employer for transferring the EPF account accumulations from his old PF account to the current PF account. Since no response was received, complainant sent an RTI application dated 30.9.2011 (Annexure C-1) with the request to provide the status of his transfer application, to which reply dated 9.11.2011 was received. Thereafter, lot of correspondence (Annexure C-3 to C-6) was exchanged. Finally on 16.4.2020, OP transferred an amount of 6,21,826/- which was short as the complainant was entitled to amount of 11,07,498/-.When the complainant objected vide RTI application dated 19.11.2020 (Annexure C-9), OP informed vide reply dated 27.11.2020 (Annexure C-9)that interest was stopped due to inoperative account from 1.4.2011 therefore interest of 2012-13 to 2015-16 was not credited. On 23.5.2021, complainant filed RTI appeal (Annexure C-10) before the competent authority but despite that the OP failed to consider the same and pay the balance amount/interest to him. Alleging the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP, complainant has filed the instant consumer complaint seeking transfer of the balance amount alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses.

2. In its written version, OP admitted the factual matrix. It is stated that the complainant was duly informed by the OP that due to some technical difficulties in processing the claim was persisting which was general for all such type of claims that is why his claim could not be processed. It is averred that the claim of the member was settled on24.2.2020 and an amount of 6,21,826/- was transferred in his current PF account. However, interest for the financial year 2010-11 was not credited by system software application due to technical error, hence interest amount of 64,841/- for the financial year 2010-11 was transferred to current PF account of the complainant. Again the case was re-examined and up-to-date interest (including UCD period) was credited with amount of3,67,052/- to the said account. Remaining allegations have been denied being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, OP prayed for dismissal of the consumer complaint.

3. In replication, complainant controverted the stand of the OP and reiterated his own. It is admitted that the OP transferred an amount of3,67,052/- on 3.4.2022 and further an amount of 64,841/- on 7.6.2022.However, it is alleged that the OP has still paid the short amount and the complainant is entitled to an amount of 1,62,296/- as per calculation sheet (Annexure C-11).

4. Parties led evidence in support of their case.

5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the documents on