Denied PF, bank guard drags firm to consumer forum

Amarjot Kaur

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, January 27

Despite repeated requests and reminders, a security guard at an Axis Bank branch in Sector 10, Panchkula, did not receive his PF after leaving the city-based Orion Security Solutions Private Limited with which he worked for two-and-a-half years. He was hired at the bank through the firm, which also has a branch in Delhi. 

Deciding Ishar Dass’s complaint, the forum president Rattan Singh Thakur and members Surjeet Kaur and Suresh Kumar Sardana directed The Orion Security Solutions Private Limited to process the release of PF amount, along with interest, on fulfilment of formalities, if any, by the complainant. The firm has also been ordered to pay Rs 3,000 as compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant, along with Rs 2,000 as litigation cost.

Dass was appointed as a security guard by Orion Security Solutions on November 27, 2014, and was assigned to Axis Bank Limited on a monthly salary of Rs 9,161. The bank started deducting Rs 1,145 as provident fund from his salary every month for the first year and Rs 1,270 per month thereafter. 

Dass served with Axis Bank for about two years and a half before resigning. However, despite completing necessary documentary formalities and making requests, the firm and Axis Bank failed to release his PF amount.

Orion Security Solutions did not appear before the forum and was therefore proceeded against ex parte.

However, Axis Bank stated that its contract was with the security firm that issued the appointment letter. The bank argued that it did not adjust PF, ESI or other benefits of the employees. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents. 

The complainant produced on record copies of the appointment letter, identity card and salary slip issued by Orion, which showed that PF of Rs 1,145/Rs 1,270 was deducted from his salary. Since, the firm didn’t appear to controvert the charge, it was proved to be deficient in rendering service to the complainant.