Disposed

Chinnamma P.J v. Union of India(Uoi)

Kerala HC14 Aug 2023WP(C)/8963/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of writ petition seeking pension contribution on actual salary. Declared matter settled by Supreme Court; directed respondents to reconsider claims in light of that decision within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to competent respondents to reconsider claims in light of Supreme Court dictum in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B within three months.

Chinnamma P.J Vs Union of India(Uoi) — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO.8963 OF 2020

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 CHINNAMMA P.J, AGED 57 YEARS, W/O.JOHN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, MANANTHAVADY KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM, LTD. NO. C271(APCOS), NORTH WAYANAD, MANANTHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT-670645, KR KKD 14885/0003, UAN NO.100125721092

¶8

2 JAMES K JOHN, AGED 54 YEARS S/O.JOHN, PROCUREMENT ASSISTANT HIGHER GRADE, MANANTHAVADY KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM, LTD NO C271(APCOS), NORTH WAYANAD, MANANTHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT-670645, KR KKD 14885/0023, UAN NO.100172091597

¶9

3 GEORGE T.M, AGED 54 YEARS S/O.MATHAI, PROCUREMENT ASSISTANT HIGHER GRADE, MANANTHAVADY KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM, LTD NO C271(APCOS), NORTH WAYANAD, MANANTHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT-670645, KR KKD 14885/0013, UAN NO.100152863544

¶10

4 SANTHOSH KUMAR.A.M, AGED 55 YEARS S/O.GOPALAN, PROCUREMENT ASSISTANT HIGHER GRADE, MANANTHAVADY KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM, LTD NO C271(APCOS), NORTH WAYANAD, MANANTHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT-670645, KR KKD 14885/0013, UAN NO.100152863544

¶11

5 P.K.PRABHAKARAN, AGED 61 YEARS S/O.CHATHU, PILARAKKANDI, MANANTHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT-670645, KRKKD 14885/0006, PP NO KRKKD 00065517

¶12

6 RAGHAVAN K.M, AGED 65 YEARS S/O.SAMBU NAIR, KIZHAKKE VEETTIL, VIMALA NAGAR.P.O, MANANTHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT670645, PPO KR/KKD/00048481, PP A/C NO.KR/KKD00014885/000/0000004

¶13

BY ADV. BABY MATHEW

¶14

WP(C) No.8963 of 2020

¶15

¶16

RESPONDENTS:

¶17

1 UNION OF INDIA(UOI), REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, NEW DELHI-110001

¶18

2 REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION (EPFO), BHAVISHANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695004

¶19

3 REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-1, OFFFICE OF THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION(EPFO), BHAVISHANIDHI BHAVAN, ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKODE673006

¶20

4 EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND TRUSTEE REPRESENTED BY MANAGING TRUSTEE, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND OFFICE, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, WAZIRPUR, NEW DELHI-110052

¶21

5 REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-1(PENSION) BHAVISHYA NITHI BHAVAN, 14-BHIKAJI CAMA PALCE, NEW DELHI-110066

¶22

6 MANANTHAVADY KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM, LTD NO.C271(APCOS), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NORTH WAYANAD, MANATHAVADY.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT-670645

¶23

BY ADVS.

¶24

SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
SRI.DR.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA, SC, EPF ORG.
SRI.S.MANU, DSGI

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 14.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

WP(C) No.8963 of 2020

¶27

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

This writ petition is filed seeking the
following reliefs:-

¶30

“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any
appropriate writ, order or direction,
directing the second, third and sixth
respondents to collect pension contribution
towards the E.P.F.Pension Scheme, 1995 from
the petitioners 5 & 6 on the basis of actual
salary drawn by them, in terms of proviso to
C1.11(3) of the Pension Scheme, from the
date of joining the pension scheme and to
grant consequential benefits of pension in
the light of Ext.P3 judgment and in the case
of existing employees such as petitioners 1
to 4 to collect pension contribution on the
basis of actual salary drawn by them and to
credit in the 1995 EPF Pension Scheme by way
of book adjustment from the amount laying in
the PF account.

¶31

ii) Declare that petitioners are entitled to
get pension contribution towards the EPF
Pension Scheme on the basis of actual salary

¶32

WP(C) No.8963 of 2020

¶33

¶34

drawn by him, in terms of proviso to
C1.11(3) of the Pension Scheme, from the
date of joining the pension scheme as
declared in the Ext.P3 judgment and for
consequential benefits such as pension.”

¶35

2. The petitioners are retired employees of

¶36

the 6threspondent establishment. They are
subscribers of Employees’ Provident Fund.
According to the petitioners, they are entitled
for higher pension under the Employees’ Provident
Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, as
per the option exercised by them. It is their
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.

¶37

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

¶38

WP(C) No.8963 of 2020 5

¶39

the writ petition is now settled by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court inEPF Organisation and Another v.
Sunil Kumar B andO thers [2022 SCC online SC 1521]
and that the grievance of the petitioners will be
considered in accordance with the directions
therein.

¶40

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of
directing the competent among the respondents to
re-consider the claims put forward by the
petitioners 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 certified copy of this
judgment.

¶41

 Sd/-

¶42

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶43

sp/16/08/2023

¶44

WP(C) No.8963 of 2020

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS :-

¶48

EXHIBIT P1COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.09.1997 OF
THE THIRD RESPONDENT

¶49

EXHIBIT P2COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.11.2011 IN
WP(C)NO.6643/2007

¶50

EXHIBIT P3COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.02.2020
IN WP(C)NO.3846/2019 AND CONNECTED
CASES

¶51

EXHIBIT P4COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.10.2014 OF
THE THIRD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE 6TH
PETITIONER DATED 04.07.2018
EXHIBIT P6COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER DATED
30.01.2018 OF THE 5TH PETITIONER

Chinnamma P.J v. Union of India(Uoi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnamma P.J v. Union of India(Uoi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sr. Litty Raphael, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Sr. Litty Raphael, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Pinky Peter, Vs State of Kerala

Ethan Titto, Vs Union of India

Cochin International Airport Mazdoor Sangh, Vs Regional Joint Labour Commissioner

K.S.Sivanandan Vs the Welfare Fund Inspector