MAFATLAL GROUP STAFF ASSOCIATIONBOMBAY Vs. REGIONALCOMMISSIONER PROVIDENT FUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By Act 16 of 1971 the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, was amended whereby the Central Government was empowered to frame a scheme to be called the Employees' Family Pension Scheme for the purpose of providing family pension and life assurance benefits to the employees of any establishment of class of establishments to which the said scheme applies. But, while introducing the said scheme the Government divided the employees into two classes, namely, the employees to whom the Act was applicable but who were in service prior to March 1, 1971 and the employees to whom the Act was applicable but who were in service from and after March 1, 1971. To the former class, an optieon was given to join the scheme or not to join, while to the latter class the schnme was made compulsorily applicable and they had to join. The petitio ers before me are the persons who have been compelled to join the said Family Pension Scheme and they say that this compulsion is in terms ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The relevant provisions in this behalf are as follows :

(3.) If the scheme is undoubtedly beneficial to every employee there would have been no difficulty at all. Similarly, if the option had been given to every one to join or not to join, again there would have been no difficulty. But the difficulty arises when the scheme compels some employees to join, and gives an option for some, not to join. The petitioners have been able to demonstrate before me that the Scheme is not wholly beneficial, as has been claimed by the Government. Essentially, the scheme is in the nature of an insurance. It covers risk. But beyond that it does very little. If an employee lives up to his full serviceable age i.e., upto the age of sixty years, whatever be his contribution to the scheme, he gets only nine thousand rupees, and nothing more. If he dies before that, subject to the number of years he has served and depending upon his salary, his widow and his other legal heirs and representatives would get a certain amount for a certain number of years. In other words, there is no guarantee under the scheme that whatever the employee contributes and whatever is contributed by the employer and the Government would come back to the employee on his retirement, or during his old age, or when he needs it most.