Kerala High Court
P.M.Pradeep Raj vs Union Of India on 24 March, 2023
WP(C) No.10175/2023 1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
Friday, the 24th day of March 2023 / 3rd Chaithra, 1945
WP(C) NO. 10175 OF 2023
PETITIONERS:
1. P.M.PRADEEP RAJ, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.P.M. PADMANABHAN, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/64883, RESIDING AT PYAR HOUSE, KALLACHI P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN
- 673506
2. CHEKUTTY M, AGED 74 YEARS, S/O.C.KUTTY, P.P.O. NO. KR/KKD/00064763,
MALAYIL HOUSE, MANIPURAM P.O., KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN -
673572
3. K.GOPALAN, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O. M.R.KUNJAN, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00065326, ALAKAPURI, MAMBARAM, KINASSERY P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN
- 678701
4. RAJENDRANATH KUMMANAT, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. C.ITTEENAN NAIR, P.P.O.
NO. KR/KKD/00065226, KUMMANAT HOUSE, NAGARIPURAM P.O., MANNUR,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678642
5. C. VIJAYAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. CHAPPUNNI NAIR, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00064818, THIRUVONAM, EDAKOTHPARAMBA P.O., PANTHEERANKAVU,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673019
6. G.P. SIVADASAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. VELUKUTTY G.P., P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00065229, KARUMBAYIL HOUSE, KUTHIRAVATTAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673016
7. M.K. ASOKAN AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. K.V.APPUTTY, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00065329, KIZHAKKE VAPPOLATH HOUSE, KOTTAM PARAMBA P.O.,
CALICUT, PIN - 673008
8. P.VENU, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. IMBICHIKANDAN, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00064822, PALATTUMMAL, CHATHAMANGALAM, NIT, KOZHIKKODE, PIN -
673601
9. K.VIJAYAN AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. K.NARAYANAN NAIR, P.P.O. NO. KR/KKD/
00065120, KALHARA HOUSE, PALATH POST, KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673611
10. M.G. SASIDHARAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. K.S.GOPALAN, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00065327,GEETHAMS HOUSE, EZHUTHASSANKANDI, MARIKUNNU P.O.,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673012
11. K.PRAKASAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. SAMI, P.P.O. NO.
KR/KKD/00065132,SWAMIJI NIVAS, KARUTHEDATH, RARICHAN ROAD,
ERANHIPALAM P.O., CALICUT, PIN - 673006
RESPONDENTS:
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND
EMPLOYMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, NEWDELHI, PIN - 110001
2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF
PROVIDENT COMMISSIONER,BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN,14,BHIKAJI CAMA
PALACE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110066
3. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
ORGANISATION NADAKKAVU- MINI BYPASS RD, NEAR PASSPORT OFFICE,
WP(C) No.10175/2023 2/6
ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673006
4. KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HOUSING BOARD BUILDING SANTHINAGAR
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
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 stay the operation of Exhibits P7 and P8 and restore/ continue
the monthly pension paid to the petitioners under their respective pension
payment orders, pending disposal of the above 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. R.SANJITH, C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH, Advocates for the petitioners, the
court passed the following:
WP(C) No.10175/2023 3/6
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 10175 of 2023
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of March, 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. Sri. G. Biju, the learned Standing Counsel, takes
notice for 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
WP(C) No.10175/2023 4/6
W.P.(C) No.10175 of 2023
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
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.
WP(C) No.10175/2023 5/6
W.P.(C) No.10175 of 2023
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."
The benefits of the said order shall be extended to the
petitioners in this case as well.
Tag this matter along with W.P.(C) Nos.4958 of 2023 and
connected cases and post on 4.4.2023.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
JUDGE
avs
WP(C) No.10175/2023 6/6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10175/2023
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO.
PENSION/2022/54877/15149 DATED 29/12/2022
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED BEARING NO.
PENSION/2022/55893/15785
