Bank of Baroda and Others Vs. Mrs. Sankari Devi - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

Judgment:

1. Bhanwar Singh, President — We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the entire record.

2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 16.3.2007 of the District Consumer Forum-I, Moradabad whereby the appellant Bank of Baroda, the succes­sor bank of the erstwhile Bareilly Corpora­tion Bank Ltd., was directed to pay to the respondent/complainant Smt. Sankari Devi interest @ 9% per annum on the P.F. amount of Rs.2,59,305, w.e.f. 1.1.1993 till the pay­ment was received on 8.3.2004.

3. Sri Durga Singh, the husband of Smt. Sankari Devi had served Bareilly Corpora­tion Bank Ltd, which was taken over by Bank of Baroda on 12.6.1999. He com­menced his service on 4.5.1954 and retired on 30.9.1992. It is not disputed that his P.F. amount of Rs.2,59,305 had been received by Sri Durga Singh during his life time vide Bank of Baroda's cheque dated 12.2.2004. Sri Durga Singh died on 23.6.2004 and af­ter his death his wife Smt. Sankari Devi filed her complaint with the allegation that there was an inordinate and unjustifiable delay on the part of the bank in releasing the amount of E.P.F. due to her husband and, therefore, the bank should be made to pay interest on the E.P.F. amount. The District Consumer Forum allowed the com­plaint of Smt. Sankari Devi and directed the Bank of Baroda to pay interest as indicated above.

4. The appellants have filed this appeal on the two fold ground - the first being that Sri Durga Singh unnecessarily entered into a litigation with the bank by filing a writ petition before the Honourable Allahabad High Court and, secondly, he himself was to blame for the delay in releasing of his E.P.F. money as he failed to fill up the claim appli­cation and submit it to the bank in time.

5. Insofar as the first plea of litigation is concerned, it may be observed that the writ petition filed by Sri Durga Singh praying for extension of his service on the plea of his date of birth being wrongly mentioned in the bank record, was dismissed on 23.9.2003. The said writ petition was filed in the year 1993, Obviously, it remained pending for about a decade and eventually it was dismissed being devoid of merit. How­ever, we find it difficult to subscribe to the argument that the plea of the bank that this litigation was a contributory factor to the delay in release of the EPF amount. The bank never conceded to his plea and always pleaded before the Honourable High Court as well as through its correspondence with Sri Durga Singh that after his retirement on 30.9.1992 he was never in service and the fact that he has ceased to be an employee of the bank w.e.f. the date of his superannua­tion was clearly spelled out in the bank's letter dated 19.4.1994, duly dispatched to him. When the bank was having a clear con­cept and record about the cessation of his, employment, the fact that a writ petition, was pending before the Honourable High Court was of no relevance or significance. Al­though there was a stay order in favour of the complainant's husband yet since he was, not allowed to resume his services, he could not have got any advantage of the stay order. We are not aware as to any contempt proceedings were initiated or not but the fact remains that the bank not only treated Sri Durga Singh to be not in service after the date of his superannuation but his writ petition too was ultimately dismissed with no advantage to him. Though it may be observed that the litigation was a futile exercise yet the fact remains that on account of writ petition pending before the Honourable High Court, there was no impediment with the bank's authorities to release the E.P.F. money. By means of the letter dated 21.12.2005 it was communicated to the counsel of Smt. Sankari Devi that a total sum of Rs.2,59,305 with contributions of the bank and the employee was due to be paid. However, either by means of this letter or any other letter the bank had not communicated either to Sri Durga Singh or his wife subsequent to his death, the main cause of delay which has taken place in release of the E.P.F. amount. What more important to note is that despite interim order of the Honourable High Court the complainant was not able to resume his service or discharge his duty and the bank also vide its letter dated 19.4.1994 communicated to him that inso­far as its relationship with Sri Durga Singh was concerned it had already come to an end with the date of his superannuation. Then mat had restrained the bank from releasing the E.P.F. amount. Neither there was any order of the Honourable High Court asking he bank not to release the retrial benefits nor Sri Durga Singh was allowed to be taken back on duty; and, nor the bank ever treated him to be in service. Then there was no point or any plausible reason to withhold his EPF amount. We are, therefore, of the view that the plea of litigation vis-a-vis release of the EPF money was absolutely irrelevant.

6. The other ground pressed into service is that Sri Durga Singh had not submitted his claim application for EPF or retiral ben­efits. Learned counsel for the appellants has drawn our attention towards the provisions of Para 72 sub-clause 5(a) and (b). If we go through the provisions of these two sub-­clauses, it is undoubtedly true that the claim application shall be filled up by the employee but this application had to be pro­vided to him by the bank. In other words, it may be observed if not provided the appli­cation form cannot be filled up and the case in hand, under the provisions of the two clauses referred to above the bank was under an obligation to get the claim appli­cation furnished and filled up but there is not an iota of evidence on record to indicate that the bank had ever despatched the pre­scribed claim application to Sri Durga Singh. If he had not come to collect the same, it could have been sent to him as recited in sub-clause (b) referred to above by post so that the formalities could be observed and the EPF amount released. We are, there­fore, not impressed with the appellants' plea that the complainant's husband was him­self responsible for the delay on his part in submitting the claim application. If on ac­count of his having preferred a writ peti­tion before the Honourable High Court he did not fill up the form there was nothing in the way of the bank to despatch it by post. When the EPF amount was finally paid the claim form was not preferred by Sri Durga Singh. If it was filled up and submitted as stated by the learned counsel for the bank, a copy thereof should have been brought on record. The contention that the Bareilly Cor­poration Bank Ltd. asked him to come and fill up the form is of no relevance at this juncture as the Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd. had full seven years at its disposal upto its merger with the Bank of Baroda to re­lease the amount of EPF but no endeavour was made by it in this direction. The Employees Provident Funds And Misc. Provi­sions Act, 1952 is silent as to what would happen if an employee does not prefer the claim form or application despite his being asked to do so. In case there was bona-fide with the bank it should have deposited the requisite amount of money either with the EPF Commissioner or an attempt should have been made to remit it by way of cheque to the individual. May be there was a clash of egoes between the bank authorities and the deceased Sri Durga Singh but the fact remains that the bank's authorities were not careful or dutiful to release the amount in time.

The crux is that this appeal fails and is, hereby, dismissed with costs which we quantify to be at Rs.5,000.

Appeal dismissed with costs.