EMPLOYEES’ PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION Vs. M. NARAYANASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the Appeals arising out of Common Order passed in batch of Writ Petitions, dtd. 27/3/2019. Some of the Writ petitions were filed to quash the Circular No.Pension-I/12/33/EPS Amendment/96 Vol.II, dtd. 31/5/2017 and consequently to grant Pension on higher wages. Set of Writ Petitions have been filed seeking direction to direct the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization (EPFO hereafter) to receive refund of Provident Fund amounts and allow the Petitioners to receive their respective Pensions based on their actual salary, as per the Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Regional Provident Fund Commissioner & anr. v. A. Majeed Kunju & ors., S.L.P. No.7074/2014, dtd. 31/3/2016; and R.C. Gupta & ors. etc. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization & ors. etc., C.A. Nos.10013-10014 of 2016, dtd. 4/10/2016. Another set of Writ Petitions have been filed seeking direction to direct the EPFO to revise the Pension as per the Circular, dtd. 23/3/2017.

(2.) The Petitions were filed by two categories of Employees: 1. Employees from exempted establishment under Sec. 17 of the Employee's Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF - MPA, 1952 hereafter) and 2. Un-exempted establishment, which are governed by the Provisions Act.

(3.) The Hon'ble Apex Court in R.C. Gupta and ors. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation and ors., 2017 (3) LLN 548 (SC) : 2018 (14) SCC 809, dealt with the question of entitlement of members of the Pension schemes, whose pensionable salary exceeded Rs.6,500.00 per month, who exercise option in terms of Proviso to paragraph 11(3) of the Employee's Pension scheme, 1995 and the Apex Court has held in Paragraph 7, 8, 9 & 10 as follows: