EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION Vs. A.CHANDRAKUMARAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) challenging the judgment dtd. 28/3/2022 in W.P.(C) No.7801 of 2020 of the learned Single Judge. Appellants were respondents 1 to 3 in the W.P.(C). Respondents were petitioners 1 to 67 and the 4th respondent, respectively in the W.P.(C).

(2.) Respondents 1 to 67 were employees of the 68th respondent, Cochin International Airport Authority (CIAL), which is a Public Limited Company. Employees of CIAL are covered by the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act) and the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995. The employer's contribution to the provident fund for the period from 1995 to 2003 was paid by CIAL on statutory limits and not on the actual salary of the respondents. Later, CIAL had submitted a series of representations (Ext.P1 series) dtd. 15/11/2018 to 7/1/2020, inter alia, pointing out its willingness to remit retrospective contribution to the provident fund based on actual salary. CIAL had also vide the said representations requested the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (appellant No.2) to process the higher pension claims of their retired employees and to grant them a higher pension. Alleging that the appellants are not acting on the specific requests made by their employer, viz., the CIAL, respondents 1 to 67 had filed the Writ Petition inter alia seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) The EPFO filed a detailed counter affidavit in the W.P.(C) inter alia, pointing out that there is no provision for accepting retrospective contribution to the Provident Fund and that the attempt of respondents 1 to 67 to get pension on their actual salary at a very belated point in time is not legally sustainable. Respondents 1 to 67 filed a reply affidavit to the counter affidavit of the EPFO. In the W.P.(C), the learned Single Judge had vide an interim order directed CIAL to produce a demand draft (DD) for the requisite sum, which was duly complied with. Thereafter, the learned Single Judge had vide impugned judgment, disposed of the W.P.(C) inter alia directing the appellants to encash the DD deposited by CIAL towards alleged deficiency and arrears and thereafter to issue a letter for details of the alleged arrears by providing record of the employees and other registers maintained in the office, including the EPF numbers assigned to the employees. It was also directed that after scrutiny of the said documents, if any further deficiency is found, the EPFO shall send the demand after undertaking the exercise of computation and shall also take action as provided under Ss. 7Q and 14B of the EPF Act.