Back
URE NTI
BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.
FA.NO.589 OF 2019
AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.355/2018 ON THE FILE OF
DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-III, HYDERABAD
Between:
Shri Kandadai Venkatacharyulu,
S/o.Late Sri K.Ramanuja Chary,
R/o.Flat No.B-501, Venkateswara Heights,
HMT Nagar, Nacharam,
Hyderabad - 500 076, Telangana.
Appellant/Complainant
And
1) The Chairman and Managing Director of
Bank of Baroda
Registered office: Suraj Plaza 1,
Sayaji Ganj, Baroda - 390 005.
(Employer formerly DENA BANK-Opposite Party No.1,
Merged with Bank of Baroda effective from 01-April-2019)
2) The Zonal Managar-Opposite Party No.2
Formerly DENA BANK - Now Bank of Baroda
Zonal Office, Usha Aishwarya House
B-02-502/AG, 1st Floor, Road No.7,
Banjara Hills,
HYDERABAD - 500 034, Telangana.
3) The Secretary/Trustee-Opposite Party No.3
PF/GI'/Pension Department
Formerly DENA BANK-Now Bank of Baroda
17, Horniman Circle, Fort,
MUMBAI-400 053.
Respondents/Opposite Parties
Counsel for the Appellant/Complainant: M/s.A.Nagaraj Kumar
Counsel for the Respondents/Opposite Parties: Sri N.V.Subba Raju
QUORUM: SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL, HON'BLE PRESIDENT
TEURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND TWENTY ONE
*******
Order
1. This is an appeal filed under Section-15
of Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 praying this Commission to set aside the
order of the District Rorum-III, Hyderabad, passed in Cc.No.355 of
2018, dated
04th
October
2019 against
the
Appellant/Complainant, thercby allowing the complaint of the
Appellant/Complainant and awarding the reliefs as prayed for by
the Appellant/Complainant.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as
arrayed in the complaint.
3. The facts in brief are that, the Complainant rendered 36
years of dedicated service to the Opposite Party Bank. On
31.03.2008 he faced extreme penalty of dismissal from the services
of the Opposite Party Bank. The Complainant's date of retirement
was on 30.09.2010. He filed a writ petition bearing No. 18420/2008
on 25.08.2008, before the Hon 'ble High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad. The Bank also initiated criminal proceedings against
him, which is pending
4. The Complainant's claims accumulated in the Provident
Fund as of 31.03.2008 in the form of Opposite Party Bank's
contribution and interest amounting to Rs.7,40,867.20 and his
individual
contribution
amounting
to
Rs.4,37,936/-.
The
Complainant alleged that, the Opposite Party Bank withheld his
individual contribution of Rs.4,37,936/- towards Provident Fund
from 01.04.2008 to 01.03.2013 and adjusted the amount on
01.03.2013 to his Clean Over Draft Loan Account
(COD)
No.073413001014. This caused great hardship to the Complainant
and hence he filed the complaint praying to direct the Opposite
Parties to pay him the outstanding amounts relating to his
Provident Fund account.
The Opposite
Parties
filed their written
version
and
5. contended that, as the Complainant was dismissed from the
services as a
punishment for misconduct, the provision of
employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act and
Schemes
are not applicable
to this Opposite
Party. The
Complainant's own contribution was adjusted towards the dues
and reduced his liability towards the principal interest owing to the
Bank in respect of loan transactions. There has been no violation
of any of the provisions. Hence, the Complainant is not entitled to
any relief claimed by him. The Opposite Parties prays to dismiss
the complaint.
6. The Complainant got himself examined as PW1
and
produced documents Ex.A1 to A13. Mr.P.Madhusudhan Reddy of
Opposite Parties examined as DW1. Both parties filed written
arguments and advanced oral arguments.
7. After hearing the both sides and upon perusal of material on
record, the learned District Forum dismissed the complaint.
Aggrieved
by the orders of the District Forum, the
Complainant filed the a
