SUDHEER KUMAR Vs. TERUMO PENPOL PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are employees of the 1st respondent establishment and members of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme as well as the Employees' Pension Scheme constituted under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act , 1952. The petitioners are remitting the provident fund contribution under the Act on their actual salary, without limiting it to the ceiling of Rs.6,500/- provided in the Act and the Scheme. The limit of contribution has now been enhanced to Rs.15,000/- as per Exhibit P3 notification. As per the amendment to paragraph 11(3), the maximum pensionable salary is Rs.15,000/-, but the provision for reckoning a higher pensionable salary, based on higher contribution, stands deleted. It is the contention of the petitioners that the petitioners are entitled to have 8.33% of the employees' contribution paid under Section 6 of the Act remitted to the pension fund without any ceiling limit and their pensionable salary reckoned based on such remittance. It is contended that paragraphs 11(1), 11(2) and 11(4) and the proviso thereto of the Pension Scheme as amended by GSR 609(E) and the deletion of proviso 8 to sub paragraph 3 of paragraph 11 as well as proviso to paragraph 12(2) are ultra vires and liable to be struck down.

(2.) The challenge against the aforementioned provisions was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in Sasikumar P. v. Union of India and others [ILR 2019(1) Ker. 614]. The matter has attained finality on the SLP filed by the Provident Fund Organisation against the Division Bench judgment being dismissed. The learned counsel submits that an identical prayer with respect to the employees of the same establishment was considered and allowed as per the judgment in W.P(C).No.1948 of 2018.

(3.) Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Provident Fund Organisation also.