Consumer Protection Act applies to disputes between pensioners and banks regarding pension payments, emphasizing the necessity of authorization for recovery of excess payments.

1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Advocate for the petitioners and Ltd. Col. (Retd.) Rakesh Bansal, in person, the respondent.

2. This revision petition has been filed against the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dehradun dated 13.03.2018 passed in First Appeal No.112 of 2016 (arising from the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dehradun dated 27.4.2016 passed in CC No.239 of 2015), whereby District Forum has dismissed the complaint and State Commission has allowed the complaint and directed the petitioners to refund an amount of Rs.3,60,758/- deducted from the pension to the complainant.

3. Lt. Col. (Retd.) Rakesh Bansal (the respondent) filed Consumer Complaint No.239 of 2015, for (i) refund of Rs.1,05,000/- with interest @ 15% per month as deducted from his pension from 01.05.2015, (ii) to pay Rs.65,000/- as compensation, (iii) to pay the cost of litigation and (iv) or any other relief which the Forum may deem fit in the circumstance of the case be granted. It has been stated in the complaint that the complainant had retired with disability from the post of Lt. Colonel, in Indian Army in 1989. Disability was counted to 50%. On the basis of Pension Payment Order issued by Principal Controller of Defence Account (Pension), Allahabad, the complainant was receiving his pension through Punjab National Bank, Branch Karanpur, Dehradun, who was a service provider of the pension, where his Pension Account No.0616000300210601 was opened. Since then, the complainant was getting pension regularly through the bank. All of sudden, the pension of the complainant was substantially reduced with effect from 01.05.2015 as the pension of April, 2015 of Rs.31,133/- was only credited to his account. The complainant raised objection regarding deduction of the pension in his account before the officials of the bank, but they did not give any satisfactory reply. Then the complainant sent a notice to the bank then they informed that the deduction was being done @ Rs.15,000/- per month from the pension of the complainant as he was given excess payment due to wrong calculation done by the officials of the bank. The complainant raised an objection that the bank is merely a service provider of the pension and had no authority to make any deduction, but no satisfactory reply was given. When the matter was brought to Inspection & Audit Section of the Bank, then a letter dated 21.09.2015 was issued, stating that this branch of bank was falling under command area of the Circle Branch at Dehradun and deduction was being made under the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India, as issued for recovery of excess payment. The complainant has pointed out various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the effect that no deduction from the pension can be made, but they went on deducting Rs.15,000/- per month. On these allegations, the complaint was filed on 09.11.2015.

4. Punjab National Bank contested the case and filed its written reply on 14.12.2015 in which it has been stated that on the basis of Government of India Notification No.412 dated 26.05.2009 certain benefits were given to the complainant with effect from 01.01.2006. While calculating the benefits and paying it, an amount of Rs.3,60,758/- was paid in excess to the complainant. Principal Controller of Defence Account (Pensions) Allahabad, U.P. issued a letter Corrigendum PPO No. M/CORR/6^th/CPC/013803/2014 dated 09.10.2014. In which, it has been mentioned that the revised rate of pension of Lt. Col. Rakesh Bansal was Rs. 21807/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and Rs. 22286/- w.e.f. 24.09.2012. Then, it was found that Lt. Col. Rakesh Bansal was given pension at the rate of Rs. 23366/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and Rs. 26265/-