Maheshwaran N.S. v. Union Of INDIA

Court
Kerala High Court
Case number
WP(C)/28103/2020
Date of judgment
22 Aug 2023
Bench
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
Petitioner
MAHESHWARAN N.S.
Respondent
UNION OF INDIA
CNR
KLHC010704062020

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 31ST SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 28103 OF 2020 PETITIONER/S:

MAHESHWARAN N.S.

AGED 58 YEARS S/O SUBHARAMA IYER, THEERTHAM, PANTHALOOR ROAD, NELLAYI P.O.THRISSUR, KERALA-680 305, EPF A/C NO.KR/KKD/000279/0001191 P.P.O NO KR/KCH/00118465.

BY ADVS.

V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR SMT.SMITHA (EZHUPUNNA) SRI.DHEERAJ KRISHNAN PEROT SMT.CHITRA JOHNSON RESPONDENTS:

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, SHRAM SAKTHI BHAVAN, RAFFI MARGH, NEW DELHI-110 001.

2 THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUN COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 066.

3 THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KOCHI-682 017.

4 THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE-673 006.

5 MATHRUBHUMI PRINTING AND PUBLISHERS CO LTD, REGISTERED OFFICE AT KOZHIKODE-673 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

BY ADVS.

SRI.M.N.MANMADAN, CGC DR.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN (SR.)

SRI.PRINSUN PHILIP SMT.J.SURYA V KRISHNA MENON BY SI. S.MANU- DSGI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 28103 OF 2020 2 J UDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:- “a) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 2 to 4 to recalculate and re- fix the pension payable to the petitioner by determining pensionable salary taking into account average monthly pay drawn during the contributory period of service in the span of 12 months preceding the date of exit from the employees pension fund and by taking into account 8 1/3% of the full contribution made in relation to the petitioner by the 5th respondent establishment without imposing any artificial wage ceiling.

b) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the espondents 2 to 4 to pay forthwith the arrears of pension and the revised mension payable to the petitioner after re-fixation of the pension payable to petitioner, reckoning pensionable salary in terms of pre-amended paragraph 11 of the pension scheme and taking into account 8 1/3% of the full contribution

WP(C) NO. 28103 OF 2020 3 made in relation to the petitioner by the 5th respondent establishment.

c) to hold that the petitioner is entitled to the benefits conferred by Ext P3 judgment, and d) issue such other writ, order or direction as are deemed just and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case.

2.

The petitioner is a retired employee of 5th respondent establishment. He is a subscriber of Employees’ Provident Fund. According to the petitioner, he is entitled for higher pension under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 as per the option exercised by him. It is his case that the pension has to be paid without limiting the amount to the maximum pensionable salary prescribed in paragraph 11(3) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995.

3.

Dr.Abraham P.Meachinkara, the learned Standing Counsel for the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation submits that the question raised in the

WP(C) NO. 28103 OF 2020 4 writ petition is now settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in EPF Organisation and Another v. Sunil Kumar B and Others [2022 SCC online SC 1521] and that the grievance of the petitioner raised in this writ petition will be considered in accordance with the directions therein.

In the light of the said submission, this writ petition is disposed of directing the competent among the respondents to re-consider the claims put forward by the petitioner in the light of the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision cited above within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE AL/-

WP(C) NO. 28103 OF 2020 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28103/2020 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDMENT AS PER GST NO 609 (E) DATED 22.8.2014 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.10.2018 IN WPC NO 13120/2015 REPORTED IN ILR 2019 (1) KERALA 614.

Original PDF on the eCourts judgment service →

Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.