Investor Issues
“The greatest drawback while dealing with regulators is their unwillingness to be assertive,” says Virendra Jain

Virendra Jain, founder of Midas Touch Investors Association, who probably has the most detailed experience of attempting to help investors with redressing grievances addressed to SEBI, talks to Moneylife about the hurdles and problems with the process 

 
In the early 1990s, a bunch of public sector banks and insurance companies were allowed to float the first set of mutual fund schemes outside the Unit Trust of India of 1964. All of them made a debut as subsidiaries of public sector entities and attracted investors due to their pedigree and by offering “assured returns” that were higher than bank fixed deposits. The Harshad Mehta scam of 1992 and the crash in share prices that followed, adversely affected the performance of most mutual funds and they were in no position to honour their commitment to investors. Canstar, a highly aggressive and popular mutual fund scheme floated by Canbank Mutual Fund, a subsidiary of Canara Bank, had raised around Rs800 crore but lost over Rs100 crore in the 1992 scam. Several of its officials were accused of colluding with the scamsters and it seemed set to ditch investors. 
 
A path breaking litigation by Midas Touch Investors’ Association, led by its founder Virendra Jain, not only helped Canstar investors get their money back, but the far-reaching judgement prevented all other mutual funds from ditching investors too. They had to be bailed out by their parent organisations and the dubious practice of ‘assuring returns’ also came to an end. 
 
Khalid Memon interviews Virendra Jain, who has since filed a litigation on the Rs1 lakh crore loss to investors on account of suspended companies and has also intervened in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against SEBI’s consent orders which let off law breakers with a small fine. 
 
Moneylife (ML): You filed a path breaking litigation regarding Canstar Mutual Fund in the 1990s. Was a public interest litigation the only option for mutual fund investors in those days? What role did SEBI play?
 
VJ: We took up this issue in 1996 and filed a writ petition, not a PIL. We followed up the issue very aggressively on behalf of investors for a year before filing the writ petition in the Allahabad High Court, in 1997. Midas Touch Investors Association was founded in 1996 and the petition was filed by us along with an individual unit holder of Canstar, who was a close family member. During the proceedings, the court itself decided to consider it a PIL; we never used the word PIL in the petition. The Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI) was in existence for five years by then and, in fact, about 5,000 Initial Public Offerings (IPO) had come out under SEBI’s (Securities and Exchange Board of India) regime.
 
ML: Will you tell us a little about the Canstar issue? 
 
VJ: Canstar was a mutual fund scheme floated by Canbank Mutual Fund in 1990 and was a 10-year scheme. It was launched as a sort of an IPO, since SEBI did not exist as a statutory body at that time, and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) permitted Canbank to launch it. While working on this petition, we had to think hard about who to blame for the mess since SEBI had not vetted or sanctioned the scheme; in fact both RBI and SEBI denied responsibility. RBI said post the SEBI Act being promulgated it was no longer responsible, while SEBI said the scheme was launched before the Act was passed so it’s not really their responsibility either. This was a huge problem for us and investors. 
 
I did a lot of research study, consulted a lot of people and we decided to focus on the fact that Canara Bank was the promoter of the mutual fund and the fact that it had ‘assured’ investors that it would quadruple their money in 10 years. We argued that since the scheme was permitted by the RBI, without restrictions on the amount raised or linking it to Canara Bank’s networth (which was around Rs500-700 crore then), there was an implied sovereign guarantee. 
 
Canara bank was 100% owned by the government. Ultimately, there was a Cabinet decision that allowed the central government to pay Rs600 crore to Canara Bank. We got the verdict because we studied the financials of the schemes and made a strong case about the role and responsibility of the parent bank which was earning a fee from the asset management company, even though the schemes themselves were losing money. 
 
ML: Midas Touch Investors Association, which you founded, won a mandate from the Investor Education & Protection Fund to run an Investor Helpline for several years. How many entities/regulators did you have to deal with in the process (SEBI/MCA/stock exchanges/companies/ others)? What has been your experience with each of them? 
 
VJ: We dealt with all the three regulators—SEBI, RBI, Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA)—and of course stock exchanges. Our experience with the regulators was mostly bad. We had a very different system of working. We took up grievances against listed companies, some mutual funds and companies that raised fixed deposits/debentures. However, we excluded stock market intermediaries. Essentially, we came across two types of grievances; first, those that should be easily resolved by companies, but are ignored because of lethargy or callousness. Such grievances formed a big part of complaints received. The second type is grievances that are difficult to resolve because investors get stuck with systemic issues. 
 
We resolved nearly 98% of the grievances, some were 10 years or more old and had not been redressed despite all efforts including litigation. The Investor Helpline was able to redress them because of sheer persistence on our part, with no litigation or notice, and without the help of any of the regulators. Our system was to write to the company first, if we did not get a proper response within 30 days, we would go to the concerned exchange. Again, if everything failed, we went to the regulator saying that the company and exchange have failed to redress the complaint and that they must take appropriate action. We provided the regulator with a history of our grievance redressal effort, which required a lot of paper work. A summary was posted on the website of the Helpline. 
 
In a few other cases which could not be resolved easily, we would go into details of the laws applicable and the possible solutions. We would also discuss it with the MCA and write notes on the systemic solution or remedial measures. I view any grievance redressal mechanism as a good microscope which gives a reflection of what is happening in that company etc, the best possible feedback one can get.
 
ML: What is the greatest drawback or hurdle while dealing with investor complaints and taking it up with regulators?
 
VJ: The greatest drawback while dealing with regulators is their unwillingness to be assertive and use the powers that are vested under various acts to ensure that grievances are redressed. You end up fighting with the regulators and it becomes a futile exercise.
 
ML: Many investors tell Moneylife that SEBI’s processes are not geared to help an investor, who has been cheated by a company or a market intermediary, to get his/her money back. If SEBI punishes the intermediary, it does not help the investor.  Is this a correct assessment? 
 
VJ: Firstly, I don’t think SEBI has appropriate processes in place for a lot of things— this comes through in our long experience of running the Investor Helpline. Secondly, if you have been cheated, SEBI has no power or intention and, worse, there is no provision of getting investor’s money back under the SEBI Act, or the Securities Contracts Regulation (SCRA) Act, or even the Companies Act or any other statute. Unless a company voluntarily redresses a grievance or pays an investor there is no redress. On very rare occasions, the government or regulator becomes extremely proactive, forces companies to disgorge money and distributes it (it has only happened once in 2010 when SEBI paid Rs95 crore to applicants of 21 IPOs in a strange process that was more of a face saver for the then chairman).  In most cases, there is no provisions of giving the investors’ money back; worse, the penal action against intermediaries is also usually too little and too late. SEBI does have powers but it does not act.
 
I am also unclear about how the SEBI process declares a complaint as having been ‘redressed’. When it comes to redressal, I would say the first focus should be on companies and then on intermediaries. At present there is no pressure on companies to act on a complaint. This goes back to what I said about the process of declaring a complaint as having been redressed. Does the company declare a problem as resolved? Is this cross checked with the investor? At Investor Helpline, when a complaint was addressed, we used to put out the details on our website and write to the investor for his/her view. We would say that if we do not hear from the investor in 15 days, the complaint would be treated as closed based on information from the other side. Shouldn’t the MCA, SEBI, RBI etc follow a similar process to document what is pending, resolved or closed etc?
 
ML: Do you believe that failure to redress grievances has any role in the sharp decline in India’s investor population over the past two decades of economic liberalization? 
 
VJ: Definitely yes. The underlying problem that we see today does not reflect the actual realities out there; the problems are far worse than what we see today. Public is completely disenchanted because systematic issues are never dealt with. The whole problem lies there—its not just about an individual grievance not getting resolved, the point is that we are not being able to resolve it. The lack of resolution is an indicator rather than the cause of the problem. It manifests as a much larger problem which the government and the regulators simply do not want to address or which they have failed to address.
 
ML: What is your experience of the grievance redress process in the capital market today? What can be done to improve it?
 
VJ: One problem we have everywhere is that a bureaucracy that is not accountable to anyone. Secondly, investors are not empowered. So they are forced to run to various officials to have their grievance resolved or to beg the company in which they have invested to resolve their issues. In my opinion, the best solution is to allow investors to directly approach a court or a forum which is adequately empowered to redress his/her grievances and to levy penalty on those responsible and also compensate the investor for the loss and effort involved in having the problem resolved. 
 
ML: In your view, which set of market intermediaries have dealt the biggest blow to investor confidence? Do you see any improvement in their regulation over the past two decades? 
 
VJ: I would put merchant bankers at the top of the list and then other intermediaries who deal with investors. For example brokers who do unauthorized trading in investors accounts, etc. It is difficult to rank other intermediaries, but based on the work we have done in primary markets I would put merchant bankers on top and all those associated with them in floating IPOs. When we talk about improvement in regulations we need to assess the impact of economic liberalization. It has virtually given companies and intermediaries the license to loot investors. Regulations are never tailored to the requirement of investors, or with their protection in mind; regulations are drafted to suit the corporate sector and essentially help them raise money easily even if it amount’s to cheating and looting of the investor. Unless there is a paradigm shift, not just an overhaul, this situation will continue.
 
ML: What is your experience, if any, of dealing with complaints against mutual funds? 
 
VJ: When it comes to mutual funds we have not dealt with them very much. Till date no mutual fund trustee has been hauled up for the wrong doings in the last 20 years.
Secondly a number of mutual fund schemes have been consistently under performing their benchmark indices but the trustees have done nothing. The asset management companies have also done nothing. It is the responsibility of trustees to oversee performance. They should be hauled up for dereliction of duty on their part.
Lastly, the Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI) is the representative body of mutual funds. It conveys the impression that it represents mutual funds, but it does not—it is more of a federation of AMC’s, which is a big distinction. 

User

Are you offered discount on MRP or maximum retail price?

Most people assume that MRP is the final maximum rate at which a product can be bought. Actual discussion with a few shops indicates that the MRP is inclusive of their profits and taxes if any. Few smart shopkeepers, in order to maintain and expand clientele, generally volunteer and give away discount on the MRP

 
Unless you are a very disciplined and organized controller of purchase at home, chances are you will go to the nearest kirana shop or your favourite supermarket, and order your grocery (I mean pick them, pushing your cart), as per list in hand, and some loose papers that were stuck on your fridge, check out by either by paying cash or use your credit/debit card!
 
You may be just busy as your wife and if she is also working, this chore may be done in a hurry. Methods of purchase may vary from one household to another, but in the end, it may not surprise you to note that you are being regularly cheated by your grocery supplier, all because you did not take the trouble to ask for price ‘reduction’ or discounts on the MRP printed on the packets of various items you buy on a regular basis.
 
Frankly, most people assume that MRP (Maximum Retail Price) is the final maximum rate at which a product can be sold to you, all because it is printed on the packet.  We continue to assume that there is ‘somewhere’, some regulation that ensures that the consumer is not ‘overcharged’ and that the price printed on the packet is the ‘maximum’ payable!
 
These are far from truth.
 
Actually, the definition of MRP is as under:
 
       ...MRP is the maximum retail price or the upper limit on the price of a good set up by the manufacturer or distributor of a good on retailers or final point of sale purchases...
 
        A maximum retail price is somewhat similar to a price ceiling in the sense that it puts an upper limit on price...
 
       However, price ceiling typically refers to a mandatory ceiling imposed by a governmental or regulatory authority while MRP refers to an upper limit on price that is agreed upon between the manufacturer/distributor and the various retailers...
 
       It includes all the taxes levied on the product.
 
Actual discussion with a few shops indicates that the MRP is inclusive of their profits and taxes if any applicable. A smart grocery shopkeeper, in order to maintain and expand his clientele, generally volunteers and gives away a discount or reduction on the MRP printed on the package of the product.
 
A further investigation revealed that while my own regular grocery supplier was happy to give a discount, he was unable to give the exact details of the discount structure (because of the large number of items that were being handled in his outlet), but mentioned that it varied from 10% -15%, normally, though, in some cases, it was much higher.  He always gave a minimum of 5% discount on my purchases but would charge 2% if I were to use a credit card, as he had to shell this out, as handling charges. Cash and debit cards were accepted without any hassle.
 
This discussion took us to the question of 500 ml pack of til oil for lighting lamps at home, supplied by Aanjaneya Agrotech of Bangalore.  The MRP was Rs62 but the grocer charged me Rs40 only! The printed label had a warning notice that it was not meant for ‘consumption’ but only for lighting lamps, as it contained a mix with RRB oil (don't know what it meant); but on the back side of the same pack, it had stated that it is mixed with "RB oil".  I am trying to find out the difference between the two!
 
In the case of Britannia biscuits, a Milk Bikis pack was originally priced at Rs10, on which we got a 5% discount; a new double pack (twice the same quantity) has been introduced, but now has been priced at Rs22 (instead of Rs20), on which a Re1 discount has been given.
 
The only subtle difference is that Britannia has managed to make the sale for double the quantity, but increased the price by 10%. This is rather unfortunate that it treats the customer like this...
 
In a likewise manner, Hopcoms have increased the price of 20 micron bags from Rs2 to
Rs2.50; Namdharis, the Organic food stuff guys have simply doubled the price of their carryon micron bags from Rs2 to Rs4 and Kentucky Fried Chicken continues to push their sale of items and encourages the buyers to take the bags and charge for it too!
 
What is the redeeming feature in these bags?  They continue to be printed in at least two languages, and our irresponsible citizens, use them, not to recycle, as much as throwing away their garbage everywhere, as though the cattle can read! (Read Retailers flout norms, make consumers pay for paper bags )
 
(AK Ramdas has worked with the Engineering Export Promotion Council of the ministry of commerce and was associated with various committees of the Council. His international career took him to places like Beirut, Kuwait and Dubai at a time when these were small trading outposts; and later to the US.)

User

COMMENTS

Suveer Bhatia

2 months ago

Magic Household Insecticide products are selling BELOW MRP on FLIPKART. Retailers are now buying directly and reselling at MRP to make huge profits!!! Order NOW!

Nimish Patel

3 years ago

what are tax liabilities of manufacturer on MRP when there is 1/3 actual sales price than MRP ??

Nimish Patel

3 years ago

What is a limit of MRP for manufacture ??

and what are the Excise liability of Manufacturer for MRP ??

Because selling price is 1/3 than MRP.

In this case is there any tax liability on Manufacturer ?

arun adalja

4 years ago

two days back dmart was offering 2lt pepsi and miranda at rs 45 while mrp is rs 65.no other supermarket can compete with dmart.

REPLY

bala

In Reply to arun adalja 3 years ago

Hi, cool drinks and other perishable items may be offered due to closest expiry date.
but every products comes under less than MRP is difficult.
I don't know, but i heard about E360.in retailers doing 5% less than MRP for each and every products.
lets wait and see.

Sanjay Bafna

In Reply to bala 3 years ago

All Dmart stores in Pune offer minimum 6% off from MRP.
Have checked expiry dates of soft-drinks and perishable items. They were never close to expiry date.

Check business standard, which explains how Dmart manages to sell things at such discounts.

anantha ramdas

4 years ago

In response to Sajay Bafna, thanks for letting us know about D-mart.

What we, as consumers need to do is to demand our right to a discount/reduction in price; if ten people in the locality demands its, then the kirana shop or supermarket will wake up and realise that they cannot fool around anymore/

Dont you remember the old adage? that mother gives milk to the child when it cries?

You have to really howl, growl and demand your share of the the MRP to get it!

anantha ramdas

4 years ago

In response to Sajay Bafna, thanks for letting us know about D-mart.

What we, as consumers need to do is to demand our right to a discount/reduction in price; if ten people in the locality demands its, then the kirana shop or supermarket will wake up and realise that they cannot fool around anymore/

Dont you remember the old adage? that mother gives milk to the child when it cries?

You have to really howl, growl and demand your share of the the MRP to get it!

Sanjay Bafna

4 years ago

Well have been to many super-markets like Reliance Mart, Spencer, More, Food Bazaar, Big Bazaar and Nilgiris. None of them offer discount on MRP as compared to DMart.
Though DMart might be a small fry compared to these biggies, it is the only one, who has understood the model of selling at discount to MRP.

They have offer minimum discount of 2% on MRP with or without credit card on all MRP items.

I remember reading Walmart CEO's comment somewhere, where he said, if there is someone who has understood Supermarket business, it is DMart.

Please note that I am in no way related to DMart. Just my 2 cents.

Harish Ramani

4 years ago

Two different MRPs for same item.
This practice is prevalent in all Automotive spare part markets.same item when sold as original spare has a different MRP and same item when sold by actual manufacturers directly has different MRP.
This practice also is prevalent in all Imported goods when same item is Imported by different Importers.

anantha ramdas

4 years ago

Thanks to Neela Govindaraj for making this reference to "senior citizen's" discounts in the medical stores. This made me recall that thanks to my own personal physician's advice, I was able to persuade my supplier to get me equivalent "generic" medicines which were much cheaper than the branded items. So, everytime we have to take medical advice, we should ask for generic equivalents and have them approved by doctor before using them!

Like Tiharwaleji pointed out this biz of MRP may "act" as a guideline; first step is to ensure that shop keepers do not charge more than the MRP mentioned in the packs and the second move is to demand a price discount.

It is common knowledge that shopkeepers tend to push items which gets them high profits; they are go to the extent of saying that "even though expiry date" is mentioned, "you can still use consume it" for another six months! I am told this is possibly true in most cases, but we have to make our own judgement in case of edible items!

TIHARwale

4 years ago

MRP is a sham.in Delhi when i try to buy Idayam Til oil i get quote for Rs 160/- for one litre bottle where as i end up buying Til oil one litre of Kamal Kasturi brand with MRP listed Rs 160/- for Rs 100 to 110 depending upon the shop keepers mood . ( i am told no shop keeper stocks any item which does not fetch him at leadt 20% profit.

So it is better to buy monthly groceries from Hyper markets who at least employ less educated citizens and provide enployment and pay at least taxes whereas your neighbourhood lala still behaves like Kanhiyalal and lala as depicted in Roti Kapda aur Makaan.

Ramdasji plaese explain why MRP should be there at all. why we cannot be happy with EX facory price and well defined Sales Tax and excise duty.

arun adalja

4 years ago

some supermarket are giving huge discount on certain products so retalers are also purchasing from there and then selling at mrp.supermarket like dmart purchases huge quantity and gets at lower price from manufacturere and selling at discount to mrp which nobody else can sell.

Neela Govindaraj

4 years ago

Many pharmacies give a 5% discount - just say the magic words "senior citizen"!
A small gricery shop also gives 2-5% discount on all branded items. We should ask for it.

anantha ramdas

4 years ago

Continuing my comments, for Mr Nandi, there has been a typographical error in the name of the stores - it is Mahalakshmi Stores, just diagonally opposite to Nilgris on the 6th block in Koramangala.

You will find them easily, as it is always crowded, and they would offer this service on their own.

There may be others in other localities - we need to find them and publicise such information, as a gesture of goodwill and friendship to our neighbours

anantha ramdas

4 years ago

In response to Mr Nandi, if you are in Koramangala, atleast I would suggest you contact Mahalakshi stores - they offer discounts without your even asking for it.

As for Jaykayess, I am also generally aware how manufacturers do the costing. For example, it would be nice if some readers from Mumbai, Srinagar, Ahmedabad or Port Blair say how much its costs them to buy Milk Bilkis of Britannia Biscuits. Naturally, the maker will take into account all relevant factors before printing out his price level on the packet, or even adopt a uniform rate, by taking into account a representative size/weight etc. The point that I make is that there are no official controls and guidelines on these matters and the consumer is left in the dark.

The crux of the matter is that by identifying the price as MRP, it tends to give an impression in the minds of people that it is a rate fixed by someone in authority. To be honest, I was told this by the shopkeeper until I made this investigation.

Writing on the subject is to enlighten the reader that he/she can demand and get a discount because it is available for asking. Like MDT has mentioned, I buy some Rs 2500 worth of medicines every month and the shopkeeper did not give any reduction; when my wife went to buy from another shop, she was offered the discount, and after hearing from her, I demanded from my supplier, and he sheepishly admitted that he had "overlooked" this aspect for a "regular" customer, and am getting 5% discount.

You need to demand it to get it and I can assure you Jaykeyess that there are variable costs involved for manufacturers when supplies are to be made in a country like India.

Buyer beware or cavet emptor is what this article tries to pass on to its reader.

jaykayess

4 years ago

This is an incomplete article, as it does not explain how a manufacturer calculates MRP. without that knowledge, a consumer has insufficient information to negotiate a discount.

A manufacturer takes his "basic" price (also known as ex-factory price), then adds the following components on top of it: Excise duty, sales tax, freight, octroi, LBT, handling, dealer margin, storage costs, etc. (Note that some of these components may not be applicable on all items or in all states).

Now, the catch is that actual costs for each of these components vary from state to state, city to city, and even dealer to dealer. So every dealer has a different landed cost. There are two major consequences of this variation:

1. Every dealer cannot give the same discount - some are able to offer higher discounts. But the catch is that the end customer (i.e., you an me) have no way of knowing which component is lower or higher for that particular dealer.

2. The MRP is calculated based on the HIGHEST possible value of each component. For example, it could include sales tax for Kerala, octroi for Mumbai, shipping costs for Nagaland, and storage costs for Jammu!!! So that's why no dealer is supposed to charge more than the MRP.

Under these circumstances, and until we have complete uniformity of local taxes across the country, it is impossible to totally eliminate these discrepancies.

That's the price the consumers have to pay for at least some degree of protection. For thos who remember, before the introduction of MRP, packages used to mention the price as Rs.X, and then there were the ominous words "Local Taxes Extra", and the dealers used to charge completely arbitrary amounts as local taxes - it was jungle law.

So personally, I would rather have the MRP regime than go back to the old system. After all, nothing in life is perfect.

RTI Judgement Series: An old woman’s struggle of over 15 years to get family pension

The illiterate old woman was not receiving her family pension for over 15 years after her husband's death. When the complaint reached the CIC, the PIO promised to make sure that she received her due pension payment. This is the 95th in a series of important judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi that can be used or quoted in an RTI application

 
The Central Information Commission (CIC) disposed a complaint after the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the Employee's Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) promised to ensure that the old woman receives her pension payment if she provides a family photograph as required.
 
While giving this judgement on 13 May 2011, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner said, “The complainant is an illiterate old lady and though her husband had died since 1993, she has not been getting the pension due to her. It may be because of the fact that the complainant is not able to deal with the bureaucratic requirements.”
 
Upli Kholi (Dist Kangra, Himachal Pradesh) resident Basla Devi, on 13 February 2009 sought information about her pension payment following her husband Parshotam Lal’s death in July 2003, from the PIO of EPFO (North) in Delhi, under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. 
 
In her RTI application, Basla Devi stated that her husband Parshotam Lal was working as D/O in Food Corporation of India (FCI) in Jalandhar district of Punjab. He expired on 21 July 1993 and the case of grant of family pension was sent to the EPFO officer on 22 October 1996. However, the family pension was not finalised even after more than 15 years. The district manager at FCI wrote several letters, sent telegrams to the EPFO office, but there was no progress.
 
The PIO, in his reply stated that Basla Devi had not received any payment of pension. “As per this office record, the claim form—in respect of late Parshotam Lal was settled in year 1996 and the pension payment order was to be issued from RPFC, Shimla, but further correspondence in this matter could not be traced in this office. RPFC, Shimla was requested to confirm whether any pension had been sanctioned to the applicant and if not then to depute an enforcement officer (EO) to collect the required forms from the applicant and forward the same to this office. In turn RPFC, Shimla has deputed the EO on 1 June 2010 to visit the residence of the applicant. The report is still awaited and as soon as the report along with the claim paper is received the claim would be settled in 30 days,” the PIO said.
 
Basla Devi, claiming that the PIO did not provide information on 31 May 2010 filed a complaint before the Commission. 
 
During the hearing, the PIO pointed out that the RTI application had not been received by the department. Basla Devi also was not able to show any proof of sending the RTI application.
 
Mr Gandhi, the then CIC, noted that “The complainant is an illiterate old lady and during the discussions, it emerges that though her husband had died since 1993, she has not been getting the pension due to her. It may be because of the fact that the complainant is not able to deal with the bureaucratic requirements.”
 
The PIO said, he had found out that the pension could be provided to her if the photographs, as required, are submitted. He also promised to personally ensure that the pension would be sent to the woman if she sends the photographs to him with the photographs of her children next week.
 
Mr Gandhi then disposed of the complaint.
 
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
 
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000696/12372
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000696
 
 
Complainant :  Basla Devi
                              VPO Upli Kholi, Tehsil & Dist Kangra,
                              Himachal Pradesh
 
Respondent    : Jaideep Chakravarty,
                             CPIO & RPFC- II, 
                             Employee's Provident Fund Organization (North),
                             Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, 
                             28, Community Centre, 
                             Wazirpur Industrial Area, 
                              Delhi - 110052

User

COMMENTS

balakrishnan

4 years ago

good mr shailesh Gandhi as CIC did, it has to be emulated ; wjy pensioners need to run pillar to post at their waning years or setting years and more so when their widows are victims!

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)