Kerala High Court
Sheela Pk vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 25 March, 2025
Author: Murali Purushothaman
Bench: Murali Purushothaman
WP(C) NO. 11656 OF 2025 : 1 :
2025:KER:25191
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 11656 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 SHEELA PK, AGED 58 YEARS
D/O.RAGHAVAN.P, PANANVALAPPIL HOUSE,
KANHIRAMUKKU.P.О, MALAPPURAM,
PIN- UAN NO.1003 49681 337, PIN - 679584
2 HAMZA P, AGED 65 YEARS
S/O. CK KADER PULPRAYAKATH (H),
PURANGU (PO), KANHIRAMUKKU (VIA) MALAPPURAM,
UAN NO.1001 6030 7185, PIN - 679584
3 Р МОНАMED ASHRAF, AGED 58 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMEDUNNI PERINCHERIYIL HOUSE,
VADAMUKKU, MARANCHRY P/O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
KERALА UAN NO. 1002 2887 7804, PIN - 679581
4 ABDUL GAFOOR. K. К, AGED 63 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMADALI, KADAVANTHODE HOUSE,
PURANGU. Р. О, MALAPPURAM DIST,
PIN- UAN NO.1000 72241 776, PIN - 679584
5 RAVUNNIKUTTY @ BABY, AGED 60 YEARS
S/O.KARUNAKARA MENON P.K., KIZHAKKE KALATHIL
HOUSE, P.O.PUDUPPALLI, VIA .B P
ANGADI.MALAPPURAM DIST. KERALA- UAN NO.1003
1173 4340, PIN - 676102
6 MOIDU NK, AGED 64 YEARS
S/O.ALU, NADUVIL KOVILAKATH HOUSE,
PO MARANCHERY, MALAPPURAM DISTRIСТ,
PIN- UAN NO.1002 3111 3769, PIN - 679581
7 VASANTHAKUMARI. O.K, AGED 61 YEARS
WP(C) NO. 11656 OF 2025 : 2 :
2025:KER:25191
,D/O. VELAYUDHAN.OK, W/O SIVAKUMAR.CA,
CHERUKANDASSERY(H), EASWARAMANGALAM.P O
PONNANI,MALAPPURAM.DT,
PIN- UAN NO.100 4008 25226, PIN - 679573
8 RAJU, AGED 61 YEARS
S/O CHEMPAN MV, MADATHIL VALAPPIL,MOOKKUTHALA,
CHANGARAMKULAM, MALAPPURAМ,KERALA ,
1002 98928 597, PIN - 679574
9 ANILKUMAR.C, AGED 60 YEARS
,YEARS, S/O.SEKHARAN NAIR CHERUVALLY HOUSE,P.O
PERUMBADAPPU, KODATHUR, PIN-
UAN NO.100 0849 36520, PIN - 679580
0 K. CHANDRAN, AGED 62 YEARS
S/O.KARAPPAN, CHERUDAVIL HOUSE, FLAT NO 3D
SREERAMAJAYAM, VIOLET APPARTMENT CHEROOR PO,
KINAR JUNCTION, TRICHUR, PIN-
UAN NO.1001 23556 399, PIN - 680008
11 RAVEENDRAN N, AGED 61 YEARS
RAMUNNI NAIR K Р, NIRAVATH HOUSE(PO)
OTHALUR WEST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN- UAN
NO.100 3097 25904, PIN - 679591
12 VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 62 YEARS
S/O.KUNHUNNI.V.V. VAZHAYIL VALAPPIL HOUSE,
ALANKODE. P. O MALAPPURAM DT, PIN- UAN NO.1004
0495 2610, PIN - 679585
13 KANDATHVEEDU KALEELURAHMAN
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O.IBRAHIMKUTTY, KV HOUSE, KOTTATHARA,
EASWARAMANGALAM PO, PIN- UAN NO.1001 8609 1555,
PIN - 679573
14 HIDER Е, AGED 61 YEARS
S/O.ENDU, ERALATHEL HOUSE, VADAMUKKU,
MARANCHERI PО, MALAPPURAM (DT), PIN- UAN
NO.1001 6440 5603, PIN - 679581
BY ADVS.
V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR
WP(C) NO. 11656 OF 2025 : 3 :
2025:KER:25191
PREEJA. P.VIJAYAN
SMITHA (EZHUPUNNA)
PAVAN ROSE JOHNSON
VANDANA BHAT T.V.
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA (UOI)
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT,
SHRAM SAKTHI BHAVAN, RAFFI MARGH,
NEW DELHI -, PIN - 111001
2 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, REGIONAL
OFFICE, P.B.NO.1806, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN,
ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE-, PIN - 673006
3 THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION,
BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI -, PIN - 110066
4 PONANI CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD NO.M 372
H.O PONNANI, C.V JUNCTION, PONNANI P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT- PIN-
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
K.N. BALAKRISHNAN, PIN - 679577
BY ADV NITA N.S
SRI.T.C.KRISHNA (DSGI I/C)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 11656 OF 2025 : 4 :
2025:KER:25191
JUDGMENT
The petitioners were employed under the 4 th
respondent. They retired from service subsequent
to 01.09.2014. They have filed this writ petition for
direction to the 2nd respondent to process the Joint
Option Forms preferred by them in the light of the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Employees Provident Fund Organisation and
another v. Sunil Kumar B. and others [2022 (7)
KHC 12], within a time frame to be fixed by this
Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Employees
Provident Fund Organisation and another
(supra), held as follows:-
"We accordingly hold and direct:-
(i) The provisions contained in the
notification no. G.S.R. 609(E) dated
2025:KER:25191
nd
22 August 2014 are legal and valid.
So far as present members of the fund
are concerned, we have read down
certain provisions of the Scheme as
applicable in their cases and we shall
give our findings and directions on
these provisions in the subsequent
sub-paragraphs.
(ii) Amendment to the pension
Scheme brought about by the
notification No.G.S.R. 609(E) dated
22nd August 2014 shall apply to the
employees of the exempted
establishments in the same manner as
the employees of the regular
establishments. Transfer of funds
from the exempted establishments
shall be in the manner as we have
already directed.
(iii) The employees who had exercised
2025:KER:25191
option under the proviso to paragraph
11(3) of the 1995 Scheme and
continued to be in service as on 1st
September 2014, will be guided by
the amended provisions of paragraph
11(4) of the pension scheme.
(iv) The members of the scheme, who
did not exercise option, as
contemplated in the proviso to
paragraph 11(3) of the pension
scheme (as it was before the 2014
Amendment) would be entitled to
exercise option under paragraph
11(4) of the post amendment Scheme.
Their right to exercise option before
1st September 2014 stands crystalised
in the judgment of this Court in the
case of R.C. Gupta (supra). The
scheme as it stood before 1st
September 2014 did not provide for
any cutoff date and thus those
2025:KER:25191
members shall be entitled to exercise
option in terms of paragraph 11(4) of
the Scheme, as it stands at present.
Their exercise of option shall be in the
nature of joint options covering pre-
amended paragraph 11(3) as also the
amended paragraph 11(4) of the
pension Scheme.
There was uncertainty as
regards validity of the post
amendment Scheme, which was
quashed by the aforesaid judgments
of the three High Courts. Thus, all the
employees who did not exercise
option but were entitled to do so but
could not due to the interpretation on
cut-off date by the authorities, ought
to be given a further chance to
exercise their option. Time to exercise
option under paragraph 11(4) of the
Scheme, under these circumstances,
2025:KER:25191
shall stand extended by a further
period of four months. We are giving
this direction in exercise of our
jurisdiction under Article 142 of the
Constitution of India.
Rest of the requirements as per the
amended provision shall be complied
with.
(v) The employees who had retired
prior to 1st September 2014 without
exercising any option under
paragraph 11(3) of the preamendment
Scheme have already exited from the
membership thereof. They would not
be entitled to the benefit of this
judgment.
(vi) The employees who have retired
before 1st September 2014 upon
exercising option under paragraph
11(3) of the 1995 scheme shall be
2025:KER:25191
covered by the provisions of the
paragraph 11(3) of the pension
Scheme as it stood prior to the
amendment of 2014.
(vii) The requirement of the members
to contribute at the rate of 1.16 per
cent of their salary to the extent such
salary exceeds ₹15,000/- per month as
an additional contribution under the
amended Scheme is held to be ultra
vires the provisions of the 1952 Act.
But for the reasons already explained
above, we suspend operation of this
part of our order for a period of six
months. We do so to enable the
authorities to make adjustments in the
Scheme so that the additional
contribution can be generated from
some other legitimate source within
the scope of the Act, which could
include enhancing the rate of
2025:KER:25191
contribution of the employers. We are
not speculating on what steps the
authorities will take as it would be for
the legislature or the framers of the
Scheme to make necessary
amendment. For the aforesaid period
of six months or till such time any
whichever is amendment is made,
earlier, the employees' contribution
shall be as stop gap measure. The said
sum shall be adjustable on the basis of
alteration to the Scheme that may be
made.
(viii) We do not find any flaw in
altering the basis for computation of
pensionable salary.
(ix) We agree with the view taken by
the Division Bench in the case of R.C.
Gupta (supra) so far as interpretation
of the proviso to paragraph 11(3)
2025:KER:25191
(pre-amendment) pension scheme is
concerned. The fund authorities shall
implement the directives contained in
the said judgment within a period of
eight weeks, subject to our directions
contained earlier in this paragraph.
(x) The Contempt Petition (C)
Nos.1917-1918 of 2018 and Contempt
Petition (C) Nos.619- 620 of 2019 in
Civil Appeal Nos.10013-10014 of 2016
are disposed of in the above terms."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners and Smt.Nita N.S., learned Standing
Counsel for the EPFO. In the nature of the order I
propose to pass, notice to the 4 th respondent is
dispensed with.
3. In the light of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court cited (supra), the
2025:KER:25191
petitioners' Joint Option Forms need to be
processed by the 2nd respondent.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of
directing the 2nd respondent to process the Joint
Option Forms preferred by the petitioners in
accordance with the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Employees provident Fund
Organisation and another (supra) within a period
of three months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
JUDGE
SB
2025:KER:25191
APPENDIX
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED
4.11.2022 EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
ORGANIZATION AND ANOTHER VS. SUNIL
KUMAR B AND OTHERS (2022 (7) KHC 12
(SC))
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT OPTION FORM
SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
25.11.2024 IN WPC NO. 39504/2024
