KIRAN RAJARAM JADHAV Vs. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

(2.) By the present writ petition instituted under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner calls in question the legality and correctness of the impugned order dtd. 28/3/2025 passed by respondent No.1, namely the Assistant Pension Commissioner, Regional Office, Dadar, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation.

(3.) The factual background giving rise to the present petition, as set out by the petitioner, is as follows. The petitioner acquired a Diploma in Pharmacy in the year 1987 and came to be selected for appointment to the post of Pharmacist with respondent No.2. The petitioner joined service on 4/5/1987 and continued in uninterrupted and permanent employment until attaining the age of superannuation on 31/1/2024. The petitioner thus rendered continuous service of approximately 37 years, which is stated to be unblemished. During the tenure of his employment with respondent No.2, the petitioner was granted two pay scale upgradations, firstly on 20/1/2000 and thereafter on 30/7/2014. It is the case of the petitioner that in terms of Sec. 6-A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 came into force with effect from 16/11/1995. The petitioner asserts that he is eligible and entitled to avail the benefits under the said Scheme. Accordingly, he exercised his option and became a member of the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in accordance with the prescribed procedure. The petitioner was allotted EPF No. MH/15257/1025 and Member ID MHBAN00152570000001025. Throughout his service, the petitioner made regular contributions to the provident fund, and respondent No.2 duly deducted and remitted both employer's and employee's contributions to the statutory authority.