High Court of KeralaDivision BenchContempt case disposed of/closed; directions is...

Cont.Case (C) No.1361 of 2019

Case / Petition Number:Cont.Case (C) No.1361 of 2019

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Anil K. Narendran
  • Sophy Thomas
Judgment Date
2023-10-10
Court Decision / Holding
Contempt case closed. EPFO directed to reconsider petitioners’ entitlement for higher pension in light of the Supreme Court’s 04.11.2022 judgment, with implementation to be in accordance with law.
Final Disposition
Contempt case disposed of/closed; directions issued to EPFO to reconsider entitlement for higher pension in line with Supreme Court judgment.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • K. Sivankutty
  • J. Retnakaran
  • C. Suresh Kumar
  • G. Sasidharan
  • P. Jayaprakash
  • K. Sivaraman
  • K. Daniel
  • T. Vijayalekshmi Amma
  • P.R. Mohanan
  • G. Sobha Roy
  • M.S. Vasanthakumari
  • R. Mohanan Nair
  • G. Maniraj
  • T. Balakrishnan Nair
  • G. Janardhanan
  • N. Indira Bai
  • T.N. Sathiamma
  • R. Laila
  • G. Laila Kumari
  • K.P. Vivekanandan
  • R. Velayudhan Pillai
  • C. Vijayaraj
  • G. Asok Kumar
  • A. Bhagavathy Sundaram
  • S. Sreekantan Nair
  • S. Radhakrishnan Nair
  • N. Balachandran
  • T.P. Bhasurangi
  • Santhakumari T.
  • T.S. Pratheep
  • J. Rajan
  • A.D. Manoharan
  • M. Abdul Jabbar
  • S. Premachandran Nair
  • P. Vijayan
  • P.P. Rugmini
  • Remesh C.P.
  • Rajamony T.
  • P. Dharmaraj
  • S. Sukumaran Nair
  • J. Prem Kumar
  • C.P. Chandramohanan Nair
  • K. Bhadran
  • T. Devadanam
  • R. Ramachandran Nair
  • N. Padmanabhdas
  • R. Sumathy
  • V. Kumaran Nair
  • E. Erani

Respondents

  • EPFO/Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO)
  • Sri. Ranjay Moosha hary, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, EPFO

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • P. N. Mohanan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smti. Nita N.S.

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a contempt petition filed under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by petitioners numbering 1–8, 10, 12–24, 27, 33–36, 40–42, 47, 51, 55–57, 61–64, 68, 72, 73, 75, 78, 81–85 in WP(C) No. 29475 of 2016, alleging willful disobedience of directions contained in Annexure A1 dated 12.10.2018 in WP(C) No. 29475/2016 and connected matters. The matter traces back to a Supreme Court proceeding arising from SLPs by the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) against the 2018 Kerala High Court judgment; the Apex Court delivered a detailed judgment on 04.11.2022 in Civil Appeal Nos. 8143–8144 of 2022 and connected matters, holding the G.S.R. 609(E) notification (2014) legal and valid and directing read-down of the pension scheme. Paragraph 44 of that judgment set out several directions including extension of options under the pension scheme, computation of pension, and related aspects. In view of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision, the petitioners’ entitlement to higher pension requires reconsideration by EPFO. The learned counsel for petitioners and respondents debated these directions, and the High Court ultimately closed the contempt case, while reserving EPFO’s right to reconsider the petitioners’ higher pension entitlement under the 2022 Apex Court ruling. The bench comprises two judges, Anil K. Narendran and Sophy Thomas. The matter is disposed of with no admission of contempt but with directions for reconsideration under law.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Article 142 of the Constitution of IndiaEmployees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952Notification No. G.S.R. 609(E) dated 22 August 2014Paragraph 11(3) (pre-amendment) of the pension scheme (1995)Paragraph 11(4) of the pension scheme (amended 2014)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • ultra vires
  • read down

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the directives contained in Annexure A1 judgment dated 12.10.2018 in W.P.(C) No.29475 of 2016 were binding and binding directions were not complied with by EPFO, amounting to willful disobedience. They rely on the apex Court’s 04.11.2022 judgment in Sunil Kumar B. and the read-downs it prescribes to the 2014 notification to demand immediate reconsideration of entitlements for higher pension. They submit that EPFO’s inaction should be treated as contempt and that the Court should enforce the directives to ensure disbursement of higher pension under the amended scheme, with appropriate back benefits.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondent EPFO contends that the 2022 apex judgment requires the authorities to reassess entitlements in accordance with law, and that the exercise must proceed under the amended pension scheme. EPFO asserts it will undertake the necessary reconsideration of petitioners’ entitlement to higher pension as directed by the Supreme Court and within the statutory framework, and submits that the contempt petition should be closed accordingly. The parties acknowledge the 2022 judgment’s directions and the need to implement them through lawful procedures.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B.AIR 2022 SC 5634PositiveCited by the Supreme Court to sustain the validity of G.S.R. 609(E) and to direct read-down and extension of pension provisions; Kerala High Court applies this authority in reconsidering entitlements.
R.C. Gupta and others v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation and others(2018) 14 SCC 809PositiveCited for interpretation of para 11(3) proviso and for guiding the exercise of option under the pension scheme; the High Court agrees with this view in interpreting the scheme.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Cont.Case (C) No.1361 of 2019 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 10[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 18TH ASWINA, 1945 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1361 OF 2019 ``` ``` AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.10.2018 IN WP(C)NO.29475/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA ``` ``` PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS 1 to 8, 10, 12 to 24, 27, 33 to 36, 40 to 42, 47, 51, 55 to 57, 61 to 64, 68, 72, 73, 75, 78, ``` ``` 81 to85: ``` ``` 1K. SIVANKUTTY, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. KUNJAN, S.G. BHAVAN, KEERTHI NAGAR, VELLAYANI, NEMOM (P.O.), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695020, PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/0001560 P.P./O. NO.KR/TVM/00067650. ``` ``` 2J. RETNAKARAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. JANARDHANAN P., THIRUVONAM, T.C. 55/2200, GPRA T3(A), MANIYANKARA THOPPU, PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000814 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00065726. ``` ``` 3C. SURESH KUMAR, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. V.K. CHAKRAPANI, SABITHA, T.C.65/965(2), OPPOSITE CHRIST NAGAR SCHOOL, KARIMKADAMUGAHAL, THIRUVALLOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695027 PF A/C NO.KR/TNM/1532/000/000688 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00071975 ``` ``` 4G. SASIDHARAN, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. JANARDHANAN, SUNDARA BHAVAN, POLICODE, VAYAKKAL P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000717 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00094934 ``` - **`5 P. JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 68 YEARS`** 2 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ``` S/O. PADMANABHA PILLAI, DEVISREE, KILITHATTUMUKKU, VARKALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695141 PF A/C NO.KR/1532/000/000808 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00062496 ``` - **`6 K. SIVARAMAN, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. KUTTY T., THALAYANATHARAYIL, KUTHIRAPANTHY P.O., THAZHAVA, VIA KOLLAM DISTRICT. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/0001139 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00084952`** - **`7 K. DANIEL, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. KOSHY, KUTTIYIL PADINJATTATHIL, NELLIKUNNAM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/0004691/000/000068 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00089752`** - **`8 T. VIJAYALEKSHMI AMMA, AGED 64 YEARS D/O. MADHAVAN PILLAI, LEKSHMI NIVAS, T.C. 54/1963(1), KIZHAKKEKONAM, PAPPANAMCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018. PF A/C`** ``` NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/00684 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00070248 ``` ``` 9P.R. MOHANAN, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN, PATHIPARAMBIL, OMKARAM HOUSE, VALLAMKULAM P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689541 PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000563 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00069754 ``` - **`10 G. SOBHA ROY, AGED 61 YEARS, W/O. PRASANNAN, PRAVEEN VIHAR, NEAR GOVT. V.H.S.S. CHINGELI, KADAKKAL P.O., KOLLAM-36. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000836P P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00098801`** ``` 11M.S. VASANTHAKUMARI, AGED 67 YEARS W/O. DAMODARAN PILLAI, KOCHU VEEDU, CHIRAYINKEEZHU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695304. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000578 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00063168 ``` - **`12 R. MOHANAN NAIR, AGED 63 YEARS S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, ARAMAM, MANCHADIMOODU, PIRAPPANCODE P.O., VENJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695607. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000720 P.P.O.`** 3 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ``` NO.KR/TVM/000673318 ``` - **`13 G. MANIRAJ, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDAN, M.C. NIVAS, PALAPPURU (NEAR L.P. SCHOOL), VELLAYANI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000793 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00069819`** - **`14 T. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 65 YEARS S/O. THANKAPPAN NAIR, VAZHAVANOOR SARASWATHY MANDIRAM, VENGANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000769 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00067956.`** - **`15 G. JANARDHANAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. GOPALAN, DHANYA BHAVAN, MANIYANKARA THOPPU, NIRAPPIL LANE, PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532C/000/000080 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00062177.`** - **`16 N. INDIRA BAI, AGED 66 YEARS D/O. NANOO PILLAI, CHANDRAKKALA, SOORYA-113, MANNAMOOLA, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695005. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000751 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00066033.`** - **`17 T.N. SATHIAMMA, AGED 64 YEARS, W/O. P.K. GOPI, CHITHIRA, H. NO.40, THOPPIL NAGAR, KUMARAPURAM, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRIVANDRUM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000584 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/68819.`** - **`18 R. LAILA, AGED 63 YEARS, W/O. K.R. SOMARAJAN, SITHARA M. ARUTHUR, NEAR SALVATION ARMY CHURCH, NEYYATTINKARA P.O., TRIVANDRUM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000556 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00074715.`** - **`19 G. LAILA KUMARI, AGED 62 YEARS, W/O. K. VASUDEVAN, KRISHNA VILASAM, VALIAVILA, THIRUMALA P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695006. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1532/000/000927 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00075912.`** - **`20 K.P. VIVEKANANDAN, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O. K. PONNAN, SUMITHA BHAVAN, KEERTHI NAGAR, VELLAYANI, NEMOM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695020. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/1494/`** 4 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ``` 000/000227 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/77807 ``` ``` 21R. VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, AGED 63 YEARS S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, VASUDEVA VILASOM, NALLORVATTOM, PLAMOOTTUKADA P.O., AMARAVILA VIA, TRIVANDRUM. PF A/C NO.KR/TVM/0001532C/000/ 00084, P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00072253. ``` ``` 22C. VIJAYARAJ, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. D. CHELLAYYAN, VAYALIL VEEDU, VIZHAVOOR, MALAYAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/000153C/000/000104 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00067805. ``` ``` 23G. ASOK KUMAR, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.M. GANGADHARAN NAIR, INDIRA BHAVAN, BELOW A.P. MEDICALS, MARKET ROAD, SREEKARIYAM, TRIVANDRUM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/00015325/000/0001617 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00063784. ``` - **`24 A. BHAGAVATHY SUNDARAM, AGED 64 YEARS S/O. B. ARUMUGHAM, THIRUVONAM, SHIVAJI JUNCTION, EDACODE, NEMOM (P.O.), TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695020. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/ 000/000826 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00070959`** - **`25 S. SREEKANTAN NAIR, AGED 71 YEARS S/O. G. SREEDHARAN NAIR, SREENILAYAM, MALAYAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695571. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/1613 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/55834.`** ``` 26S. RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 70 YEARS S/O. S. SREEDHARAN NAIR, K.V. VILASOMM, ELEMANOORKONAM, NARUVAMOODU P.O., TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695528. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001494/000/000337 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00052957. ``` - **`27 N. BALACHANDRAN, AGED 67 YEARS`** ``` S/O. P. NARAYANAN, PULIVILAKATHU VEEDU, SREERAM NAGAR, NETTAYAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695013. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000978 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00062726. ``` ## **`28 T.P. BHASURANGI, AGED 70 YEARS,`** 5 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ``` W/O. G. PURUSHOTHAMA PANICKER, BHASURA, ARUVIPURAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000994 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00056455. ``` ``` 29SANTHAKUMARI T., AGED 62 YEARS, W/O. T. STEPHEN, S.S. NIVAS, PAZHAYAKADA, THIRUPURAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695033. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532C/000/000094 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00074729. ``` - **`30 T.S. PRATHEEP, AGED 66 YEARS`** ``` S/O. A. THANKAPPAN NAIR, TC 77/846, JYOTHIS, MOONNAMANNACKAL, PETTAH P.O., TRIVANDRUM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532C/000/000100 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00066030. ``` ``` 31J. RAJAN, AGED 74 YEARS, S/O. JOSEPH, KUZHIVILA VEEDU, VIZHAVOOR, MALAYAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000748 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00039276. ``` ``` 32A.D. MANOHAR, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. G. DAMODHARAN NAIR, MADHAVAM, VELLAMKETTUVILA, NEMOM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695020. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0000213 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00070375. ``` - **`33 M. ABDUL JABBAR, AGED 62 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, PUTHIYA VEETTIL, PUTHEN VEEDU, PALACKAL, THEVALAKKARA P.O., KOLLAM690524. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0004691/000/0000050 P.P.O. NO. KR/TVM/00094256.`** - **`34 S. PREMACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 66 YEARS S/O. SIVASANKARA PILLAI, T.C. 39/2157, PARAKUDIVILAKAM, MANACAUD P.O., TRIVANDRUM695009. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0001016 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00065086.`** - **`35 P. VIJAYAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. K. RAJAGOPALA MENON, ASKOHA, T.C.NO.17/353 (1), CHANDIYARA, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695012. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000783 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00060585.`** 6 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ``` 36P.P. RUGMINI, AGED 71 YEARS W/O. V. RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR, T.C.15/2006, VRA-A- 16, SREE BHAVANAM, WOMEN'S COLLEGE LANE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0001638 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00054118. ``` - **`37 REMESH C.P., AGED 71 YEARS, S/O. CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI, NIRVRITHI, RISHIMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695035. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0001639 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00054548.`** - **`38 RAJAMONY T., AGED 63 YEARS, W/O. M.V. SREEDHARAN, SREE RAJ NIVAS, CHEKKEIKULAM P.O., KOODALI, KANNUR-670592. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000830 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00046642.`** ``` 39P. DHARMARAJ, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O. PONNAYYAN NADAR, ARADHANA, THAVARAVILA, CHAIKOTTUKONAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0001555 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00077344. ``` - **`40 S. SUKUMARAN NAIR, AGED 68 YEARS S/O. SREEDHARAN PILLAI, TC 20/2507(2), SURABHI,`** ``` OPP. GOVT. HSS FOR GIRLS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001494/000/000135 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00060893. ``` - **`41 J. PREM KUMAR, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. JANARDANAN, KUNIKODE VEEDU, PANKOTTUKONAM, MANCHAVLAKAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695503. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0000588 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00074591.`** - **`42 C.P. CHANDRAMOHANAN NAIR, AGED 61 YEARS S/O. S CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, M.S. BHAVAN, NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, ANCHAL P.O., KOLLAM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0000911 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00100723.`** - **`43 K. BHADRAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. KANNU ASSARI, SANTHI BHAVAN, NADUVATH, KARAKKAMANDAPAM, NEMOM`** 7 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ``` P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000093 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00066701. ``` ``` 44T. DEVADANAM, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. THANKAYYAN, PRIYA BHAVAN, MANCHAVILAKAM, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695503. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0001605 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00065786. ``` - **`45 R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 72 YEARS`** ``` S/O. N. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, ANAYARA HOUSE, PLAVODE, KODUNGANOOR P.O., VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000979 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00051988. ``` ``` 46N. PADMANABHADAS, AGED 70 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR, POOJITHA, TC 5/1182, DPN 148, PONNU PILLAI LANE, SURVEY SCHOOL ROAD, PEROORKKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/0001641 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00056108. ``` ``` 47R. SUMATHY, AGED 69 YEARS, W/O. R. KRISHNAN, SUKRUTHAM, THOPPUVILAKAM, TC 50/243(2), KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/000/000998 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00060056. ``` - **`48 V. KUMARAN NAIR, AGED 71 YEARS`** ``` S/O. VASUDEVAN PILLAI N., GOPALA NIVAS, MANIBHAVAN LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/0001532/415 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/55379. ``` ``` 49E. ERANI, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. ELIYAS, ELITE HOUSE, MATHILIL, PERINAD, KOLLAM. P.F. A/C. NO.KR/TVM/ 1532/000/456 P.P.O. NO.KR/TVM/00077598. ``` ``` BY ADV P.N.MOHANAN ``` 8 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ## **`RESPONDENT/2[ND] RESPONDENT:`** ``` SRI. RANJAY MOOSHAHARY, S/O. RANJITH S. MOOSHAHARY, AGED 41 YEARS, REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (EPFO), BHAVISHANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004, RESIDING AT PF QUARTERS, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ``` ``` BY ADV SMT.NITA.N.S. ``` ``` THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 9 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ## **JUDGMENT** Anil K. Narendran, J. The petitioners, who are petitioners 1 to 8, 10, 12 to 24, 27, 33 to 36, 40 to 42, 47, 51, 55 to 57, 61 to 64, 68, 72, 73, 75, 78, 81 to 85 in W.P.(C)No.29475 of 2016, have filed this Contempt Case, invoking the provisions under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging willful disobedience of the directions contained in Annexure A1 judgment dated 12.10.2018 in that writ petition along with W.P.(C)No.13120 of 2015 and connected matters. 2. The SLP filed by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation against the judgment dated 12.10.2018 in W.P.(C) No.13120 of 2015 and connected cases were dismissed by the Apex Court vide order dated 01.04.2019 in SLP (C) - Diary No.9610 of 2019. That order was recalled and the Apex Court rendered a detailed judgment dated 04.11.2022 in Civil Appeal Nos.8143 of 2022 and 8144 of 2022 and connected matters- **Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B. [2022 (7) KHC 12 : AIR 2022 SC 5634]** . In that judgment, the Apex Court held that the provisions contained in Notification No.GSR 609(E) dated 22.08.2014 is legal and valid. The directions contained in paragraph 44 of the said judgment of the 10 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ## Apex Court dated 04.11.2022 read as follows: ## “44. We accordingly hold and direct:- (i) The provisions contained in the notification No. G.S.R.609(E) dated 22nd 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 subparagraphs. (ii) Amendment to the pension scheme brought about by the notification No. G.S.R. 609(E) dated 22[nd] 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 option under the proviso to paragraph 11(3) of the 1995 scheme and continued to be in service as on 1[st] 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 1[st] September 2014 stands crystalised in the judgment of this Court in the case of **R.C. Gupta and others v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation and others [(2018) 14 SCC 809]** . The 11 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 scheme as it stood before 1[st] September 2014 did not provide for any cut-off date and thus those 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 preamended 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, 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 1[st] September 2014 without exercising any option under paragraph 11(3) of the pre-amendment 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 1[st] September 2014 upon exercising option under paragraph 11(3) of the 1995 scheme shall be 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 12 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 salary exceeds Rs.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 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 amendment is made, whichever is 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) (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.” 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also 13 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 the learned Standing Counsel for the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, for the respondent. 4. In view of the judgment of the Apex Court dated 04.11.2022 in Civil Appeal Nos.8143-44 of 2022 and connected matters **[2022 (7) KHC 12 : AIR 2022 SC 5634]** , the entitlement of the petitioners for disbursement of higher pension requires reconsideration at the hands of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation. 5. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent would submit that the aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation in accordance with law. In the said circumstances, this Contempt Case is closed, without prejudice to the right of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation to reconsider the entitlement of the petitioners for disbursement of higher pension, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court dated 04.11.2022 in Civil Appeal Nos.8143-44 of 2022 and connected matters **[2022 (7) KHC 12 : AIR 2022 SC 5634]** . Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** Sd/- **SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE** AV/17/10 14 Cont.Case (C)No.1361 of 2019 ## **`APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1361/2019`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` ANNEXURE A1A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT 12/10/2018 DATED IN WPC NO.29475/2016. ANNEXURE A2A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 24/12/2018 SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE JUDGMENT. ```