DR. MURALY P Vs. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is an employee who retired from the service of the 5th respondent. The petitioner also worked in the 6 th respondent from 17-08- 1990 to 28/2/2021. He has approached this court seeking the following reliefs;

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Employees Provident Fund Organization would submit that in order to calculate the entitlement of the petitioner for higher pension, the details of bulk payment made by the employer, amounting to Rs.40,03,150.00 and 13,12,563/- [for the period from 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 credited in the months of November 2006 and March 2008] in respect of all units have to be made available. It is submitted that the bulk payment was made on 16/11/2006 and 16/3/2008. It is submitted that, unless the month-wise details of the payment which will identify the member in whose favour the payment is made, the month and year to which payment relates, the employer contribution and the employee contribution and the contribution to the pension scheme, it will be impossible for the Provident Fund Organization to calculate the entitlement of the individual petitioner. It is also submitted that the salary details of the petitioner has also to be produced.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in this writ petition and the learned counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organization, I am of the opinion that the learned counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organization is right in contending that unless the details mentioned above are made available by the employer, it might not be possible for the Provident Fund Organization to calculate the benefits payable to the petitioner or others, who may not have approached this Court. The 5th respondent had made the payment in bulk on account of the fact that for the period 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 [credited in the month of November 2006 and March 2008] the contribution was not made on the basis of actual salary and was made on a lesser amount and was subject to statutory limits.