Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner v. P.P.Ramachandran
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 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WA.No. 2482 of 2015 -------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 28-04-2015 IN WP(C) 13108/2015. .........
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4:
--------------------------------------------------------
1. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION (EPFO), SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, V.K. COMPLEX, FORT ROAD, KANNUR-670 001.
2. THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 066.
3. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR & DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, SHRAM SAKTHI BHAVAN, RAFFI MARGH, NEW DELHI-110 001.
BYSRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ADV.SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC,EPF ORGANISATION RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS AND 1ST RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. P.P.RAMACHANDRAN, 'CHOTHI', THALIYIL KUZHICHAL, P.O PARASSINIKKADAVU, KANNUR-670 563.
2. M.A.RAVEENDRAN, M.A.HOUSE, KUZHICHAL, P.O PARASSINIKKADAVU, KANNUR-670 563.
3. CHANDRAN.A.P, 'GEETHAM', P.O.KALLIASSERY, KANNUR-670 562.
4. K.V.RAMACHANDRAN, 'USHAS', HAJIMOTTA, P.O.KALLIASSERY, KANNUR-670 562.
5. PADMAVATHI E.P, 'EASAVASYAM', VADESWARAM.P.O., AROLI, KANNUR-670 566.
--2--
--2-- WA.No. 2482 of 2015 -----------------------------
6. V.RADHAM, 'SARATH', ANCHAMPEEDIKA, VIA MATTAMMAL, KANNUR-670 331.
7. P.V.SANTHANAVALLY, 'ADITHYA', THALIYIL, P.O.KUC, KANNUR-670 567.
8. P.V.PURUSHOTHAMAN, 'AAKARSH', KALLIASSERY.P.O., KANNUR-670 562.
9. JANAKI V, 'SAYOOJYAM', MANANGAD, KALLIASSERY.P.O. KANNUR-670 562.
10. GOPINATHAN V.V, 'ANURAG', P.O.ANCHAMPEEDIKA, KANNUR-670 331.
11. T.P.VENUGOPALAN, 'SOBHA NIVAS', POOMANGALAM, P.O.PANNIYOOR, KANNOOR-670 142.
12. C.K.RADHAMANI, CHENICHERI, KANDAMBETH HOUSE, KALLIASSERY.P.O., KANNUR-670 562.
13. O.V.ANANDAN, 'ORAVANKARA', MANANGAD, KALLIASSERY.P.O., KANNUR-670 562.
14. P.MALLIKA, 'SHANGRILA', BAKKALAM, P.O.KANUL, KANNUR-670 562.
15. C.PADMINI, CHENAL HOUSE, SREESHYLEM, THALIYIL, P.O.KALLIASSERY, KANNUR-670 562.
16. KELTRON COMPONENT COMPLEX LIMITED, KALLIASSERY.P.O., KANNUR-670 562.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
R1 TO R15 BY ADV. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS R16 BY ADV.SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-11-2015 ALONG WITH WA.2515/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
K. SURENDRA MOHAN & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
------------------------------- W.A.NO.2482 OF 2015 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 25th November, 2015.
JUDGMENT
Surendra Mohan, J.
The appellants challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 28.4.2015 in W.P.(C) No.13108 of 2015. 2.
Respondents1 to 15, 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 employees of the 16th respondent. They are covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the
Employees Pension Scheme, 1995.
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 15 is not authorised by the Statute. The cut off date of 01.12.2004 stipulated for
extending the benefits of removal 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 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 jj /True copy/