T. RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 4th respondent is an establishment covered under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The petitioner herein was an employee and he had retired from service on 30.11.2013 on attaining superannuation. The petitioner was covered under the Contributory Provident Fund. In terms of para 26(6) of the Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, the employee as well as the employer had exercised joint option and contributions were paid on his actual salary.

(2.) According to the petitioner, Section 6A of the Act was introduced for creating a pension scheme to the employees and the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 was framed. The maximum pensionable salary was initially fixed at Rs.5,000/- which was later enhanced to Rs.6,500/-and such sums from the employer's contribution under Section 6 not exceeding 8.33% of the basic wages, Dearness Allowance and retaining allowance were to be the corpus of the Pension Fund. Subsequently, a proviso was added to Clause 11(3) of the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 with effect from 16.03.1996 granting an option to the employer and the employee to contribute amounts towards the Pension Fund at the rate of 8.33% of the actual salary, where the salary exceeded Rs.6,500/- per mensem. Thereupon, most of the employees, who were drawing salaries in excess of the prescribed limit, opted to pay contributions on the basis of the actual salary paid by them. However, the requests made by some of the employees were rejected on the ground that the option to pay higher contribution was not exercised on or before 01.12.2004, which date was fixed as the cut off date. This was challenged before this Court by certain employees by filing W.P.(C) Nos.6643 and 9929 of 2007. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by judgment dated 04.11.2011, in W.P.(C) No.6643 of 2007 and connected cases, held that the proviso which was added with effect from 16.03.1996 was retrospective and is operative from the date of commencement of the scheme which was on 16.11.1995. It was further held that the cut off date fixed by the organization as 01.12.2004 is clearly without jurisdiction. It was also held that, if a joint application is filed by the employee as well as the employer at any time, the benefits of the proviso to Clause 11(3) of the Employees' Pension Scheme cannot be denied to the employees. The operative part of the order is extracted below for easy reference.

(3.) The said judgment was taken in appeal by the Union of India as well as the EPF Organisation. A Division Bench of this Court by judgment dated 5.3.2013 in W.A. No.568 of 2012 dismissed the appeals. Though the judgment of the Division Bench was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by Ext.P4 order in S.L.P. No.7074 of 2014 which is dated 31.03.2016, those appeals were dismissed, finding that there was no valid ground for interference.