Rajendranathan Nair vs Employees Provident Fund ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4765 Ker

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
         Thursday, the 13th day of April 2023 / 23rd Chaithra, 1945
                           WP(C) NO. 13944 OF 2023
PETITIONERS:

  1. RAJENDRANATHAN NAIR, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O RAMANATHA PILLAI.K TC
     4/1395(3) ,KARTHIKA, ARA-118AMBALA NAGAR ROAD AMBALAMUKKU,KOWDIAR.PO
     TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, PIN - 695003
  2. MADHUSOODHANAN .T, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O A.THANKAPPAN SANDHYA BHAVAN,
     KPNRA-73 KANJIRAMPARA P O TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT , PIN - 695030
  3. M.P SASIDHARAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O POKKAN MECHAM PARAMBATH
     PAZHANAKAVE,NUT STREET.P O VADAKARA, CALICUT DISTRICT, PIN - 673104
  4. ASHOKAN .P, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O KUMARAN .PTHAMP,NUTSREET.P.O,VADAKARA
     CALICUT DISTRICT, PIN - 673104
  5. RAJAN .K.M, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O KRISHNAN . K . M
     KRISHNA,KARTHIKAPALLY VADAKARA, CALICUT DISTRICT , PIN - 673542
  6. KRISHNAN .P, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O KANARAN .P PARAKKAK HOUSE,
     KARTHIKAPPALLY. P O VADAKARA, CALICUT DISTRICT , PIN - 673542
  7. SOBHANA. M, AGED 68 YEARS, D/O GOVINDAN PARAMBATH MEETHA,
     NADAKKUTHAZHA,VADAKARA CALICUT DISTRICT, PIN - 673104
  8. NANCY .T.D, AGED 69 YEARS, W/O K V.CHERIAN LAVANYA, TC 63/1672,PLOT
     NO-19 ASWATHY GARDENS AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT , PIN -
     695026
  9. B. BHUVANACHANDRAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O P. BHASKARA PANICKER KRISHNA
     VILASAM BUNGLOW VLAGAMURI,NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, PIN -
     695121
 10. M. JAYAKUMAR NAYAR, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O K. MADHAVAN NAIR SREE HARI, H
     NO:54 KRISHNA NAGAR PEROORKKADA , TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT , PIN - 695004
 11. RAJAN . V.K, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O POKINAN VALAKKAT THAZHA KUNI
     MADAPPALLI COLLEGE . P O VADAKARA, CALICUT DISTRICT , PIN - 673102
 12. CHANDRA BOSE .M, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O MADHAVAN TC
     32/1427,SWATHI,CHACKAI PETTAH .P O TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT , PIN -
     695024
 13. MOHANA KUMAR .G, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O GOPALAN . M KAIPPADICKAKL HOUSE,
     KARAKULAM P O TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT , PIN - 695564

RESPONDENTS:

  1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION , REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL
     PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER - I (PENSION), EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
     ORGANIZATION HEAD OFFICE, MINISTRY OF LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT (UNION OF
     INDIA ), BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAWAN, 1, BHIKAJICAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI ,
     PIN - 110066
  2. ADDITIONAL CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER ZONAL OFFICE
     EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, PATTOM ,TRIVANDRUM , PIN -
     695004
  3. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
     ORGANIZATION REGIONAL OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM. , PIN - 695004
   4. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
     ORGANIZATION REGIONAL OFFICE, ERANHIPALAM, CALICUT. , PIN - 673006

     Writ Petition (Civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to direct the respondents to pay back the amount unlawfully
deducted from the pension of the petitioners from the month of january
2023 onwards immediately, pending disposal of the writ petition and direct
the respondents not to make any further deductions from the enhanced
pension amount in the months to come.
     is petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.
S.KRISHNA MOORTHY(ERNAKULAM), V.KRISHNAN KUTTY, MARIAMMA MERCY
KANJANAPILLY & BALAGOPALAN B., Advocates for the petitioners, the court
passed the following:
                        RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
                      -------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C) No.13944 of 2023
                   -------------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 13th day of April, 2023

                                       ORDER

Smt. Nitha N.S., the learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the

respondents.

2. This Court had occasion to consider identical issues in W.P.(C)

Nos.4958/2023 and connected cases, and an interim order was passed on

01.03.2023. The said order reads as under:-

"Petitioners herein are persons covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. These writ petitions are filed complaining that the respondents, by misconstruing the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in EPF Organisation and Another v. Sunil Kumar B and Others (2022 SCC Online SC 1521), are discontinuing/curtailing/reducing the pension that was being received by the petitioners and that too without hearing them.

2. The Standing Counsel appearing for the EPF had sought time for getting instructions, and all the matters were posted today for considering the grant of the interim order.

3. I find that the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, with the approval of the Central Provident Fund Commissioner, has issued a directive vide No.Pension/2022/55893/15785 dated 25.01.2023, the operative portion of which reads as under:

'8. Utmost care should be taken to identify such cases where higher pension was granted on account of judgment of any W.P.(C) No. 13944 of 2023

Court. In such cases, a favorable order shall be obtained from the concerned Court citing the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 04.11.2022 before going ahead with stopping/restoration of pension to wages up to ceiling of Rs.5000 or Rs.6500/-.'

4. I also find that in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 in W.P.(C).No.4958/2023, it is stated that the pension in respect of the petitioners therein was stopped inadvertently due to some technical glitches and when the same was brought to the notice of the respondents the pension in respect of the petitioners therein were immediately released.

5. Having considered the grievance of the petitioners and taking note of their submission that the pension received by them was being stopped/reduced abruptly, this Court had directed the respondents not to precipitate the issue until the issue is taken up and heard today.

6. When the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri.N.N Sugunapalan, and Sri.S.Gopakumaran Nair, the learned senior counsel appearing for the EPF Organisation, submitted that they require further time to respond to the contentions raised by the petitioners in these writ petitions.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners urges that despite the directions issued by this Court, not to precipitate the issues until the request for interim relief sought by the petitioners is taken up and considered, the respondents have curtailed/reduced/stopped the pension that was hitherto being received. It is submitted that there is absolutely no justification on the part of the respondents in initiating such action.

Having considered the submissions, as the matter is being adjourned at the request of the respondents and as the matter is under active consideration of this Court, the respondents shall ensure that they shall not curtail/limit/stop the pension that was being received by the petitioners in these writ petitions without getting specific orders from this Court."

W.P.(C) No. 13944 of 2023

3. The benefits of the said order shall be extended to the

petitioners in this case as well.

Post after six weeks.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE NS