REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs. GURNAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal which is barred by a delay of 21 days in tiling and 22 days in re-filing is directed against the judgments of the learned trial Court dated June 7, 2006 and that of the learned first Appellate Court dated May 21, 2008.

(2.) THE plaintiff/respondent No. 1 filed a suit seeking declaration to the effect that he is entitled to all the benefits of monthly pension under Family Pension Scheme which has been withheld illegally by the appellant pertaining to his account No. HR- 5832/8. It was pleaded by him that the aforesaid benefits have to be granted to him for the period of service which he had rendered. The demand of the appellant for depositing a sum of Rs. 24,370/- was also assailed by him and prayed that the said demand be declared as illegal. A prayer for mandatory injunction was also made to direct the appellant to unconditionally release all the benefits due to him. The plaintiff/respondent No. 1 pleaded that he was appointed as General Attendant at sainik Parivar Shiksha Kender Va Bal Bhawan, chhachhrauli on December 14, 1973 and he rendered his services till January 31, 2002 as chowkidar. Prior to the joining of his service with respondent No. 2, the plaintiff was in the indian Army. He prayed for his entitlement of monthly pension under the scheme.

(3.) THE appellant and respondents No. 2 and 3 denied the claim of the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 and relied on para 10 of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the scheme'), which is reproduced hereinafter, to contend that the respondent/plaintiff was not covered in the scheme. It was pleaded that the scheme under. the Employees' Provident Funds and miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was taken up by the Regional Provident Fund commissioner, Haryana in the year 1990, who informed that the scheme would be applicable from August 1, 1992. Respondents No. 2 and 3 deposited their share of the contribution w. e. f. August 1982 to March 1990. The employees including the plaintiff were asked to deposit their share of EPF for the same period but they expressed their inability to deposit it. The plaintiff/respondent, however, started contributing his share w. e. f. April 1990.