Dhruvraj Kumar Shandilya vs Employee Provident Fund ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2701 MP

                         - : 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
              AT I N D O R E
                BEFORE
        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA



            WRIT PETITION No. 11039 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
SWARNJEET SINGH MAGO S/O SHRI KRIPAL
SINGHJI MAGO, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: RETIRED, R/O BH-47, SCHEME 74-
C, VIJAY NAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                          .....PETITIONER
(BY AVIRAL VIKAS KHARE-ADVOCATE)


AND
EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION,
MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVERNMENT OF
INDIA, THROUGH REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND
COMMISSIONER,      REGIONAL     OFFICE,
PRADHIKARAN BHAWAN-7, RACE COURSE
ROAD, INDORE.
                                        .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR JAIN-ADVOCATE)

            WRIT PETITION No. 8564 of 2020

BETWEEN:-
ARUN P. KAPADNIS S/O PRABHAKAR KAPADNIS,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RET, R/O.
81-E, RAJENDRA NAGAR, DISTRICT INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
                                          .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AVIRAL VIKAS KHARE-ADVOCATE)

AND
EMPLOYEE PROVINDENT FUND ORGANISATION
                               - : 2 :-

MINISTRY OF LABOUR GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
REGIONAL OFFICER PRADHIKARAN BHAWAN-7,
RACE COURSE ROAD INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
                                               .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA-ADVOCATE)


              WRIT PETITION No. 11041 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
DHRUVRAJ KUMAR SHANDILYA S/O LATE SHRI
RAMRAKHAMAL SHANDILYA, AGED ABOUT 65
YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED, R/O 174-DC,
SCHEME NO. 74C, VIJAY NAGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
                                                    .....PETITIONER
(BY AVIRAL VIKAS KHARE-ADVOCATE)

AND
EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION,
MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVERNMENT OF
INDIA, THROUGH REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND
COMMISSIONER,      REGIONAL     OFFICE,
PRADHIKARAN BHAWAN-7, RACE COURSE
ROAD, INDORE.
                                               .....RESPONDENTS
(BY PANKAJ KUMAR JAIN-ADVOCATE)
         RESERVED ON          ; 16.01.2023
        DELIVERED ON         ; 14.02.2023.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:
                             ORDER

1. The petitioners have filed these petition challenging the action of the respondent by which they have cancelled the pension order and reduced the pension of the petitioners.

2. The petitioners are seeking enhancement of pension payable by the respondents on the basis of full salary as per provision of

- : 3 :-

Section 11(3) of Employees Pension Scheme, 1995.

3. This Writ Petition was filed after the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of R.C. Gupta and Ors Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization & Ors (SLP(C) Nos.33032-33033 of 2015). After filing this petition, the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court has been referred to the larger bench for reconsideration vide order dated 24.08.2021 in Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 8658-8659 of 2019. During pendency of this Writ Petition, the Larger Bench of the Apex Court has answered the reference by issuing certain directions to the PF Authorities to implement as enumerated in para 44 of the judgment.

4. The respondent organization has filed an application seeking disposal of this Writ Petition in terms of the order passed by the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 8658-8659 of 2019 (supra) with a direction to the Organization to re-consider the entitlement of the members to get an enhanced amount of pension.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court has disposed of the number of Writ Petitions by directing the Commissioner, Regional Provident Fund to consider and decide the claims of the petitioner in terms of judgment passed in the case of R.C. Gupta (Supra) and the Larger Bench in case of the Employee Provident Fund Organization and Anr Vs. Sunil Kumar B. and Ors within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of the order.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that so far these petitioners are concerned the Larger Bench has already upheld the view taken by the Division Bench in the case of R.C. Gupta

- : 4 :-

(Supra), and it is mandatory for PF authorities to implement the directives contained in the said judgment within a period of eight weeks which had already been expired. In the reference matter, the Apex Court has only considered the issue of enhancement of pension for those employees who did not exercise the option under paragraph 11(3) and continued to be in service as of 01.09.2014, secondly those members of the scheme who did not exercise the option and their right to exercise the option before 01.09.2014 stands crystallized, thirdly, the employee who had retired before 01.09.2014 upon exercising the option. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that only those employees who had retired prior to 01.09.2014 without exercising any option under paragraph 11(3) had already exited from the membership, they would not be entitled to the benefit of this judgment, therefore, there is no option left to the authorities but to give the benefit of 11(3) of the Scheme.

7. It is further submitted that after the order passed by Apex Court in case of R.C. Gupta (Supra), EFPO completed all formalities and found these petitioners entitled for revise of the pension 01.09.2014 to Rs.18,286/- by issuing pension order dated 13.12.2018 but during Covid period, they have suddenly cancelled the pension order and reduced the pension. In identical situation, Principal Bench in W.P. No.11461/2021 has allowed the writ petition vide order dated 15.06.2022 and restored the revise pension. Now in light of judgment passed in Employee Provident Fund Organization (Supra), there remains no grounds to deprive the petitioners for getting the pension or actual salary on which contribution was made for the entire service period for which there is no change in the judgment passed in case of R.C. Gupta

- : 5 :-

(Supra).

Heard and conclusion.

8. It is not in dispute that all the issues relating to the enhancement of PF pension have been put to rest by the Apex Court in the case of R.C. Gupta (Supra) and Employee Provident Fund Organization (Supra). These two judgments are going to give benefits to large numbers of employees as well as retired employees, therefore, PF Authorities should be given a reasonable time to examine the case of each and every petitioner and pass an appropriate order for the grant of pension. The PF Organization is required to examine the contribution, calculate the pension etc. Therefore, for these exercises, the respondents are seeking four weeks♠time only which appears to be sufficient for the purpose of € compliance of the orders passed by the Hon♠b€le the Supreme Court of India (supra).

In view of above, all these writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondents to reexamine the issues raised by each petitioner/member of the petitioner association/member of the scheme who has not approached this court. That entire exercise be completed within 4 weeks from the production of the Certified Copy of this order with a detailed representation.

Office is directed to place the copy of this order in all above connected Writ Petitions.

Certified copy as per Rules.

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE praveen

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN NAYAK Date: 2023.02.15 11:42:51 +05'30'