PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A And E) I vs BHUWAN CHANDRA PANT

THIS is a revision against the judgment and order dated 29.9.1999 passed by District Consumer Forum, Nainital in Complaint Case No. 86 of 1998.

THE necessary facts on which the decision of this revision depends are that the complainant had filed a complaint with the allegations that from Provident Fund Account No. RTU 465 he got a life insurance done on 17.4.1969 and paid a premium of Rs. 5,000/-. A sum of Rs. 228/- per annum was to be paid in instalments as premium from the said amount. Keeping in view this fact, the Accountant General was required to give this Rs. 5,000/- alongwith 12% per annum interest at the time of retirement. THE amounts which were sent by the Life Insurance Corporation on 23.7.1984 were not deposited by the Accountant General in the Provident Fund Account and a sum has also not been paid to the complainant. It was informed by the Accountant General''s section vide letter dated 23.2.1989 that the policy amount of Rs. 1,000/- shall be payable on 17.4.1989. It is further alleged that inspite of several letters a mention of which has been made in Annexure 4 of the complaint, the Accountant General has sent after four years cheque of Rs. 3,648/-. THE bonus and the interest has not been paid so far even though the policy has matured on 17.4.1994. THE complainant, therefore, has prayed for recovery of this amount alongwith interest. It is further alleged that the complainant is also entitled to the entire amount of the policy amounting to Rs. 17,077/-. He has also prayed for recovery of this amount alongwith 12% per annum interest. A preliminary objection was raised by the applicant, Accountant General that the District Forum had no jurisdiction to try this complaint.

The learned District Forum, after considering the case of the parties, law on the point, held that the complaint has not been filed for payment of the provident fund account but it relates to the life insurance policy which was being financed from the provident fund. It, therefore, decided the issue in favour of the complainant.

AGGRIEVED against this order of the District Forum, the appellant has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by the District Forum. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant. The service on opposite party No. 1 has been made in December, 1999 by registered post which was not received back unserved. Hence service on the opposite party is presumed. The appeal is being decided on merits.

IT is an undisputed fact that the case for retirement benefits is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act and the person who has deposited any amount towards provident fund and has any grievance with respect to the pensionary benefits cannot file a complaint before the learned District Forum or the State Commission because the Accountant General performs a statutory duty under the provisions of the Provident Fund Act. But as far the question of financing the policy of life insurance from the provident fund is concerned, the same is not covered under the provisions of the Provident Fund Act. The Provident Fund Act does not provide that the Accountant General shall also be responsible for providing service to the contributors for life insurance which are financed from the provident fund. This is an extra work which is being done by the Accountant General not under the provisions of the Provident Fund Act but under the policy of the Government. Therefore, in respect of the work which the Accountant General does in relation to the life insurance policies which are financed from the provident fund account, it is not covered by the provisions of the Provident Fund Act but the policies of the Government which may be made either in the Government notification or regulations framed by the Government for this purpose. Hence we are of the opinion that the order passed by the District Forum is perfectly right and requires no interference. The revision is therefore, liable to be dismissed. Order The revision is dismissed. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties, and a copy be sent immediately to the District Forum concerned. Revision dismissed.