Brij Mohan Gupta vs Employee Provident Fund Organisation
2023 Latest Caselaw 20209 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Brij Mohan Gupta vs Employee Provident Fund Organisation on 1 December, 2023

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                               1
                            IN    THE         HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                ON THE 1 st OF DECEMBER, 2023
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 14505 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           BRIJ MOHAN GUPTA S/O SHRI SHANKAR LAL GUPTA,
                           AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE R/O 39,
                           SPORTS COMPLEX DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI AVIRAL VIKAS KHARE, LEARNED COUNSEL)

                           AND
                           EMPLOYEE   PROVIDENT  FUND   ORGANISATION
                           THROUGH     EMPLOYEE    PROVIDENT    FUND
                           COMMISSIONER REGIONAL OFFICE PRADHIKARAN
                           BHAWAN 7 RACE COURSE ROAD INDORE (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL)

                                 T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed following reliefs:-

In the facts and circumstances of the present case the petitioner humbly prays that this petition may kindly be allowed and by issuing:

a . Appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or other, the impugned order dated 15.05.2023 be quashed for being illegal.

b . Appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or other, the impugned pension order issued on ceiling limit be quashed and the respondent be directed to issue revised pension order on the basis of actual wages.

c . Appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or other, the respondents be directed to calculate and pay the arrears of pension after sanctioning the rightful pension on the basis of full salary along with all other consequential benefits.

d . Appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or other, the respondents be directed to pay interest at the rate of 15% on the entire arrears of pension illegally denied to the Petitioner.

e. Costs of this petition be awarded.

f. Any other appropriate relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, be awarded to the petitioner.

2 . Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment delivered by Coordinate Bench at Jabalpur in WP No.14425/2021 (Shiv Prasad Soni vs. The

Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Ors.) and other connected writ petitions. The impugned order was quashed by the Coordinate Bench in view of the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of R.C. Gupta & Ors. vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Ors. (2018) 14 SCC 809. It is also argued that after the said judgment, the respondents filed Review Petition No.334/2023 (The Regional P.F. Commissioner & Anr. vs. Rammani Tiwari) in the light of subsequent judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8658-8659 of 2019 (The Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Anr. vs. Sunil Kumar & Ors.). After considering both the judgments, the review petition has been dismissed with the following observation:-

35. Now, as has been held by Supreme Court in R.C. Gupta (supra) that only adjustments are required to be made by the Provident Fund Commissioner and that being not disturbed by the Larger Bench of Supreme Court, there is no ground to review the order of this Court dated 15.06.2022 passed in Writ Petition No.14425/2021 and other connected matters.

3. Counsel for the respondent submits that against the order passed by Coordinate Bench in Writ Petition and Review Petition, the respondents have filed writ appeal before the Division Bench. However, no material is filed in regarding to filing of appeal and stay by Division Bench.

4 . After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the judgment passed by Coordinate Bench in the case of Shiv Prasad Soni (supra) and in Review Petition No.334/2023 and the fact that the said order is not stayed by Division Bench, the same is binding on this Court, therefore, the present petition is also allowed in terms of the order passed by Coordinate Bench in WP No.14425/2021 and Review Petition No.334/2023. The orders passed in the aforesaid cases shall apply mutatis mutandis in the present case.

5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE soumya