A.V.Mary vs The Regional Provident Fund ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9686 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
 MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 20TH BHADRA, 1945
                     WP(C) NO. 10667 OF 2020
PETITIONER:

         A.V.MARY, ARATTIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O.
         ASANPADY, PAZHANGANAD,PIN-683 562.
         MOB : 9446140150
         BY ADVS.
         ASOK M.CHERIAN
         N.SATHEESH
         K.JANARDHANA SHENOY
         PRIYA CAROL


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
         EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION,
         REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN,
         PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 004.
    2    KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING AND
         MARKETING) CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS
         MANAGING DIRECTOR, BEVCO TOWER, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.
         PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 033.
    3    THE STATE OF KERALA,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO EXCISE DEPARTMENT,
         SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001.
         BY ADV SRI.NAVEEN.T., SC, KERALA STATE BEV.CO.
         R1 BY SMT.NITA.N.S, SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 11.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                    Sathish Ninan, J.
            ==============================
                WP(C) No.10667 0f 2020
              ==========================
      Dated this the 11th day of September, 2023

                            JUDGMENT

The claim of the petitioners is for higher

pension in terms of the Employees' Provident Scheme

- 2014 amendment. The validity of the amended

Employees' Provident Scheme was upheld by the Apex

Court in Employees' Provident Fund Organisation and Another v.

Sunil Kumar.B. [2022(7)KHC 12].

2. The learned Standing counsel for the

respondents points out that, in the light of the

Supreme Court judgment it is open for the

respondents to make a fresh application in terms of

the amended scheme claiming higher pension, which

could be considered in accordance with the scheme

and the directions in the judgment. WP(C) No.10667 0f 2020

Resultantly, the writ petition is disposed of

permitting the petitioners to file appropriate

application seeking enhanced pension in terms of

the amended scheme and the directions of the

Supreme Court. If such an application is submitted,

the same shall be considered by the appropriate

authority of the Organization without delay.

Sd/- Sathish Ninan, Judge

amk APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10667/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF GO (RT) NO 453/2014/TD DATED 25.6.2014.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 4.9.2019

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 25.9.2019

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF A LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 3.7.2019 WHICH THE PETITIONER OBTAINED ON APPLICATION MADE UNDER RTI ACT

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.7.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN REPLY TO EXHIBIT P4 W2HICH THE PETITIONER OBTAINED MADE UNDER RTI ACT