A teacher at the Bolgatanga Girls’ Senior High School, Daniel Tang, has dragged the National Association of Graduate Teachers (NAGRAT) before the Bolgatanga Circuit Court over an alleged 15% “liquidation charge” deducted from his contributions to the association’s fund.
Mr Tang, who was a member of NAGRAT until August 2025, is challenging the deduction of GH¢2,463.03 from his accumulated contributions and accrued interest after he exited the union.
According to his Statement of Claim filed at the Circuit Court in Bolgatanga, the disputed amount formed part of GH¢16,420.22 which he says stood to his credit in the NAGRAT Fund at the time he withdrew his membership.
Mr Tang states that, as a member of NAGRAT, he was an automatic contributor to the association’s fund, which is managed by trustee Axis Pension Limited.
He maintains that his contributions were deducted at source by the Controller and Accountant General’s Department from his after-tax income.
The plaintiff says he exercised his right to leave NAGRAT in August 2025 and subsequently applied for payment of his total contributions together with accrued interest.
He claims the amount due to him was GH¢16,420.22.
However, on February 5, 2026, NAGRAT allegedly credited his Stanbic Bank account with GH¢13,951, leaving a shortfall of GH¢2,463.03.
Mr Tang says he subsequently complained about the difference and was directed by NAGRAT to access his statement through the online portal of Axis Pension Limited, the trustee of the fund.
The plaintiff claims that further enquiries at the NAGRAT Secretariat revealed that the outstanding GH¢2,463.03 represented a 15% “liquidation charge” imposed on his fund.
According to the Statement of Claim, NAGRAT subsequently confirmed the deduction in a response to a petition he had submitted to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) through the NAGRAT Upper East Regional Chairman.
Mr Tang, however, says the explanation provided by NAGRAT conflicted with information he received from the fund’s trustee.
He states that in an email copied to NAGRAT and the National Pensions Regulatory Authority (NPRA), Axis Pension Limited allegedly denied knowledge of, or responsibility for, the 15% liquidation charge.
The plaintiff argues that the conflicting positions raise questions about the basis on which the money was deducted from his fund.
Mr Tang is also alleging that the disputed deduction is not an isolated incident.
He claims that in May 2019, he applied for payment of his contributions and accrued interest, which amounted to GH¢3,398.74.
According to him, NAGRAT paid him GH¢2,825, leaving GH¢563.74 unpaid.
He contends that the outstanding amount represented another 15% deduction from the total amount standing to his credit.
The plaintiff therefore alleges that there has been a pattern of deductions from members’ accumulated contributions when they seek to exit or withdraw their funds.
At the heart of Mr Tang’s legal challenge is his contention that there is no provision in the NAGRAT Constitution authorising the imposition of a 15% liquidation charge when a member exits the fund.
He further claims that he never signed any agreement with NAGRAT authorising the association to deduct 15% of his contributions and accrued interest upon withdrawal.
He argues that the deduction was therefore made without a contractual or constitutional basis.
Mr Tang describes the alleged deduction from his after-tax mutual fund contributions and accrued interest as an “injustice” against him.
The plaintiff says he has exhausted several avenues in an attempt to recover the disputed amount without success.
According to him, a demand notice served on NAGRAT through its Upper East Regional Chairman, John Akunzebe, by the Bolgatanga Magistrate Court, did not result in the repayment of the money.
He claims that despite his efforts to resolve the matter, his attempts to recover the GH¢2,463.03 have been met with what he describes as strong resistance.
The suit was filed at the Bolgatanga Circuit Court on September 5, 2026.
Mr Tang is seeking reliefs endorsed on his writ of summons, although the Statement of Claim provided does not set out those specific reliefs in detail.
The case brings into focus questions about the terms governing contributions to NAGRAT’s fund, the rights of members who leave the association, and the authority under which deductions are made from members’ accumulated contributions.
The allegations contained in the Statement of Claim are the plaintiff’s claims before the court and have yet to be determined. NAGRAT will have the opportunity to respond to the allegations through the judicial process.
By 1960new.com
