Union Of India v. V.John Varghese
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/8TH ASWINA, 1937 WA.No. 2076 of 2015 () IN WP(C).5446/2015 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 5446/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 20-02-2015 APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:
---------------------------------------
1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (EPFO) BHAVISHANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
3. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (EPFO) BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, KOLLAM - 691 001.
BY ADVS.SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC,EPF ORGANISATION RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS & 4TH RESPONDENT:
--------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------
1. V.JOHN VARGHESE VALLAYIL VEEDU, ALAMCHERY, EROOR P.O.
KOLLAM - 691 312.
2. C. REMESHAN DEVIKRIPA, NEAR CHAMUNDI TEMPLE, PALLIPURAM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695316.
3. L. THOMASKUTTY NIRAPPUVILA VEEDU, PODIYATTUVILA P.O., VALAKOM KOLLAM - 691 532.
4. ABDUL KARIM S.S.VILLA, NETHAJI NAGAR, H. NO. 58 KAVANAD P.O., KOLLAM - 691 003.
5. S. UDAYAKUMARI DEVI PALATHINKEEZHIL, CHIRAKKADAVAM, KAYAMKULAM P.O. ALAPPUZHA.
-2WA.No. 2076 of 2015
6. S.N. RAJENDRAN UNNITHAN SREESAILAM, MALACKAL P.O., MADAVOOR PALLICKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 602.
7. V. PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, KARALI MANAYIL, PANMANA P.O., CHAVARA KOLLAM.
8. G. CHANDRAN KOTTAYI THARAYIL, ERUVA EAST P.O., KAYAMKULAM ALAPPUZHA.
9. M. HARIDASAN ARUN NIVAS, KANNIMOOLA THEKKEMATHILIL P.O.
KOLLAM - 691 601.
10. G. SATHYASEELAN SATHYA NILAYAM, KOTTUKAL P.O., ANCHAL VIA KOLLAM.
11. K. MOHANACHANDRAN SIMI BHAVAN, OYOOR, KARINGANNOOR P.O.
KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM.
12. E. JAMALUDHEEN KUNJU ELINJICKAL THEKKETHIL, CHAVARA BRIDGE P.O., KOLLAM.
13. G. RAJENDRAN REMIYA BHAVAN, PUTHUKKADU, CHAVARA P.O.
KOLLAM.
14. LEKHA V.
MANNUR KANIYIL, MOTTACKAL, THEVALAKKARA KOLLAM.
15. M. MADAN PILLAI PRIYADARSINI, SUBSTATION LANE, PAPPADU NETTAYAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 013.
16. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION REPRSENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSHEERA BHAVAN PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
R BY SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN R BY SRI. P.N.MOHANAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kkj
K.SURENDRA MOHAN & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
--------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2015
J U D G M E N T
Surendra Mohan, J.
The appellants challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20.02.2015 in W.P.(C) No.5446 of 2015. 2.
Respondents 1 to 15, retired employees of the 16th respondent, had filed the Writ Petition seeking inter alia, a direction to the appellants to permit them to enjoy higher pensionary benefits as per the Employees Pension Scheme by computing pension contributions on the basis of their actual pay in excess of the ceiling limit and transferring contributions computed on the said basis to the Pension Fund. Respondents 1 to 15 are retired employees of the 16th respondent. They were covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995.
-:2:- 3.
At the time of promulgation of the Pension Scheme, there was a ceiling limit on the maximum pensionable salary, which was 6,500/- per month.
₹ Therefore, contributions towards the Pension fund were payable only on the said amount even in cases where the actual salary drawn by an employee was much higher. The said restriction has subsequently been removed. 4.
In the present case, it is admitted that contributions at the rate of 12% of the salary of the employees together with an equal contribution of the employer, have been remitted to the Employees Provident Fund Organisation. However, only contributions computed at the rate of 8.33% of the maximum salary of 6,500/- have ₹ been remitted to the Employees Pension Fund. The balance amount has been retained by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation. The above action according to respondents 1 to 3 is not authorised by the Statute. The cut off date of 01.12.2004 stipulated for extending the benefits of removal
-:3:- of the ceiling limit on salary is also attacked as arbitrary. The learned Single Judge has found in favour of respondents 1 to 15 on all the points and has allowed the Writ Petition. 5.
Heard. The learned Single Judge has allowed the Writ Petition following the dictum of a Division Bench of this Court in another Writ Appeal. We notice that the issue has been conclusively decided by this Court in judgment dated 05.03.2013 in W.A.No.1137 of 2012, judgment dated 16.10.2014 in W.A.No.1442 of 2014 and judgment dated 07.01.2015 in W.A.No.1956 of 2014. A copy of judgment dated 06.08.2015 in W.A.No.1587 of 2015 has also been placed before us. It is also pointed out that the issue is pending consideration of the Apex Court in S.L.P Nos.16867 of 2013 and 7075 of 2014 besides, other connected cases at the instance of the appellants herein.
In view of the binding precedents of this Court on the point, we find no infirmity in the judgment appealed against. We note that the learned Single Judge has taken
-:4:- care to make his orders and directions subject to the decision of the Apex Court in the matter. Therefore, no further directions are necessary to be issued in the said regard also.
In view of the above, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE Sd/- SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE kkj // True Copy // PA to Judge