Lata Maharana vs INDIAN RARE EARTHS LIMITED

BEING felt aggrieved by the order of the District Forum rejecting her complaint, the complainant has filed this appeal.

THE appellant filed the complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents in the matter of non -payment of full insurance amount. The facts of the complaint are in a narrow compass. The appellants case is that his son Jayadev Moharana was working as an Assistant Foreman under the Indian Rare Earths Limited, Matikhalo (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 1). While in service, he had taken three policies namely, (i) MP No. GI (EDLI) 30458 for Rs. 37,000, (ii) LIC policy No. 580059320 for Rs. 25,000 and policy No. GSLI 30110 for Rs. 70,000. He died on 6.5.1994 while in service. The premium amounts covered under the policies were deducted from his monthly salary by the respondent No. 1 who used to remit the same to the respondent No. 2. After his death the appellant being the mother and legal representative of the deceased Jayadev Moharana claimed the amounts from the respondents. Instead of paying the full amount under the policies the respondent No. 2 paid a portion of them without any legal justification. The respondent No. 1 in his version took the stand that the policy No. MP (EDLI) 30458 was for Rs. 26,000 only. The enhanced coverage upto Rs. 37,000 was applicable in case where the average P.F. balance during the period of 12 months preceding the date of death of the employee exceeds Rs. 25,000. As the P.F. balance of the deceased during the preceding 12 months of the death did not exceed Rs. 25,000 the appellant is not eligible for the benefit of Rs. 37,000. Regarding the other two policies the stand of the respondent No. 1 is that the deceased joined service in December, 1984 but he remained absent from duty from August, 1989 till his death on the ground of his prolonged illness. In view of the length of his regular service, he was not eligible for leave treatment and other benefits during his absence. No premium for the MP No. GI (EDLI) 30458 was deducted from his salary. The premium amounts under the other policies were paid upto 1989 -90 from the salary and thereafter the deceased was not entitled to receive payment of any salary because of his prolonged absence. The respondent No. 1 however paid premium upto March, 1992 purely on humanitarian ground. The deceased being the policy holder was responsible for non -payment of the amounts after March, 1992 as per the letter of authorisation given to him. As he did not pay the premium after March, 1992 the two policies lapsed.

THE case of the respondent No. 2 is that due to non -payment of the premium amounts the LIC policy and the GSLI policy automatically lapsed and only amount due on the basis of the premiums remitted, was paid to the appellant. Had the premium amounts been paid till the death of the deceased the appellant would have got the full benefit. She was entitled to Rs. 26,000 under policy No. MP No. GI (EDLI) 30458 and the same amount was paid to her.

IT is an admitted fact that the deceased had taken policy No. GI (EDLI) 30458, LIC Policy No. 58005932 and GSLI 30110 while he was in service under the respondent No. 1. He died on 6.5.1994 and the respondent No. 1 paid Rs. 26,000 under the policy No. GI (EDLI) 30458. Under the policy No. 580059320 a sum of Rs. 3,833 and policy No. GSLI 30110 a sum of Rs. 2,666 was paid towards settlement of the claim. The claim of the appellant that under policy No. GI (EDLI) 30458 she is entitled to get Rs. 37,000 is not tenable. The said policy was for Rs. 26,000 only. The enhanced amount of Rs. 37,000 is admissible in case where the average P.F. balance during the period of 12 months preceding the death of the employee exceeds Rs. 25,000. So far as the deceased is concerned his P.F. balance during the preceding 12 months of his death did not exceed Rs. 25,000. Ext. A is the statement of P.E. payment of the deceased during the preceding 12 months of his death which would show that total amount including the employers contribution was only Rs. 24,247. As it did not exceed to Rs. 25,000 the appellant is entitled to Rs. 26,000 only and not Rs. 37,000. The District Forum for the above reasons has rightly rejected the claim of the appellant.

WITH regard to payment under other two policies, it may be stated that they automatically lapsed for non -payment of premiums after March, 1992. It is also an admitted fact that the deceased remained absent from duty on the ground of illness from August, 1989 till his death. In view of his limited qualifying service, he was not entitled to get any salaries from 1.4.1990. The premium amounts upto March, 1992 were paid by the respondent No. 1 on humanitarian grounds. The Senior General Manager of respondent No. 1 issued circular stating that the concerned employee is to take up personally with the LIC to revive of the discontinued policy. The letter of authorisation given by the deceased in favour of the employer under which he undertook the responsibility for any consequence for non -payment of the premiums on his policies for reasons beyond the control of the employer. As indicated, he had no leave to his credit and, therefore, question of drawing of his leave salary and deduction of the premium form the salary does not arise. This is apparently beyond the control of the employer. Ext. 4 is the Bank account which shows that the salary was last paid to him on 30th of August, 1989 and other credits were made by transfer or interest. Ext. 5 is the pay slip for the month of May, 1994 during which month he expired. As the two policies of he deceased lapsed after April, 1992 and were not revived during his life -time question of full claim under the two policies did not arise.

FOR the reasons mentioned above, we do not find any merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Mr. Subash Mahtab, Member -I agree. Appeal dismissed.