Kerala High Court
K.P.Thomas vs Union Of India (Uoi), Represented ... on 13 April, 2023
WP(C) No.13655/2023 1/5
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. 13655 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
K.P.THOMAS, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O K.G.POULOSE, KURIKKATTAYIL, PANIPRA
P.O, THRIKKARIYUR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686692 ,
P.P.O.NO.KR/KCH/00112976
RESPONDENTS:
1. UNION OF INDIA (UOI), REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF LABOUR & DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT NEW DELHI, PIN -
110001
2. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (EPFO), BHAVISHANIDHI BHAVAN,
KALOOR, ERNAKULAM , PIN - 682017
3. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-1 (PENSION), EPFO HEAD OFFICE,
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, BHAVISHYA
NITHI BHAVAN, 14- BHIKAJI CAMA PALACE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110066
4. AUTOKAST LTD REPRESENTED BY MANAGER (HRD), S N PURAM P.O, CHERTHALA,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688524
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 i) stay further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P11, in respect of
the petitioners who are getting higher pension after exercising the option
under para 26 (6) of the EPF Scheme, 1952 and ii) for an interim direction
that the second respondent to ensure that they shall not curtail / limit /
stop the higher pension that was being received by the petitioners, since
retirement, pending disposal of the writ petition.
This 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.P.N.MOHANAN, C.P.SABARI, AMRUTHA SURESH & GILROY ROZARIO, Advocates
for the petitioner, the court passed the following:
WP(C) No.13655/2023 2/5
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 13655 of 2023
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of April, 2023
ORDER
The learned DSGI takes notice for the 1st respondent. Sri. Sajeev
Kumar K. Gopal, the learned Standing Counsel, takes notice for respondents
2 and 3. Issue notice by speed post to the 4th respondent.
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:
WP(C) No.13655/2023 3/5
W.P.(C) No. 13655 of 2023
'8. Utmost care should be taken to identify such cases where
higher pension was granted on account of judgment of any 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."
WP(C) No.13655/2023 4/5
W.P.(C) No. 13655 of 2023
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
sru
WP(C) No.13655/2023 5/5
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13655/2023
Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.PENSION /2022/ 54877/15149
DATED 29.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL CENTRAL PF
COMMISSIONER
