High Court of KeralaDivision BenchContempt case closed, with direction that EPFO ...

Cont.Case (C) No.2316 of 2019

Case / Petition Number:CON.CASE(C) NO. 2316 OF 2019

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Anil K. Narendran
  • G. Girish
Judgment Date
2023-10-25
Court Decision / Holding
The Contempt Case is closed. The court holds that the petitioners’ entitlement for disbursement of higher pension requires reconsideration by the EPFO in light of the Apex Court’s 04.11.2022 judgment in Civil Appeal Nos. 8143-44 of 2022 and connected matters. The order directs the EPFO to undertake the reconsideration exercise as per law, and to implement the directives within a reasonable time frame, with the right of petitioners to seek further relief if required. The case is disposed of, without prejudice to EPFO’s right to reconsider entitlement under the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Final Disposition
Contempt case closed, with direction that EPFO reconsider petitioners’ entitlement to higher pension in light of the Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment; without prejudice to EPFO’s right to implement the directions in a lawful, time-bound manner.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • JANARDHANAN.K.
  • KUNHIRAMAN.M.
  • SAHTHEESAN E.S.
  • SOUDHAMINI KHALID
  • SURENDRAN.C.
  • RAJAN. V.
  • SANTHA.T.
  • SIVADASAN.N.
  • JAYAMMA.M.V.
  • RADHA.A.P.
  • PRABHAKARAN.P.
  • AJOY DAS
  • MATHEW KUTTY K.K.
  • GEETHA.CK.
  • SHIBU. T.P.
  • SABU. P.K.
  • SIVAPRASAD T.K.
  • MUHAMMED NOOHU P.N.
  • BALACHANDRAN.S.
  • NAJEEB.P.P.
  • RAMANANDAN.E.
  • PRADEEP KUMAR. V.P.
  • JAMES JOSEPH
  • LALITHAMBIKA P.D.
  • SUSEELA.T.C
  • VIJAYAN.P.
  • GAYATHRI.S.
  • RAMPATHY YADAV
  • ARUMUGHAM NELLAYI PARAMBIL
  • SASI.P.C.
  • JAYAPRAKSH.T.
  • SAJEEVAN.C.K
  • JAYAPRAKSH.T.
  • SAJEEVAN.C.K

Respondents

  • B. Andrew Prabhu (Assistant P.F. Commissioner, Regional Provident Fund Office, Kochi)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • SRI.K.SASIKUMAR
  • • SRI.S.ARAVIND

Counsels for Respondents

  • • SMT.NITHA N.S

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Contempt of Court case arises out of W.P.(C) No.32461/2016 and connected matters filed by petitioners/ employees of the Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. (KSCMF). The petitioners sought enforcement of directions issued by the Kerala High Court in an earlier judgment (Annexure I dated 12.10.2018) in W.P.(C) No.32461/2016 with respect to pensionary benefits under the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) scheme, particularly in light of post-2014 amendments to the pension scheme. The petitioners alleged willful disobedience of the High Court’s directions and filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The respondents contended that the Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment in Sunil Kumar B. v. EPFO upheld the validity of Notification G.S.R. 609(E) (2014) and directed steps to align the pension scheme with 2014 amendments, and that a reconsideration of pension entitlements by EPFO was warranted. The High Court, after considering the Apex Court’s 2022 decision and its own earlier orders, held that the petitioners’ entitlement for higher pension requires reconsideration by EPFO and ultimately closed the contempt petition, preserving EPFO’s right to reconsider in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. The order reflects a structured mechanism for EPFO to comply in accordance with law within the noted directions.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Notification No. G.S.R. 609(E) dated 22 August 2014Pension Scheme (Post Amendment 2014) paragraphs 11(3) and 11(4)The Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952Article 142 of the Constitution of India

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • ultra vires
  • read down

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that Annexure I judgment (dated 12.10.2018) in W.P(C) No.32461/2016 directed EPFO to implement higher pension under the scheme as it stood prior to 2014 amendments and to grant options to employees under the amended framework. They rely on the Supreme Court’s later 2022 decision in Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B. (AIR 2022 SC 5634) upholding the legality of G.S.R. 609(E) and directing corrective steps, including extended time for options and readjustment of pension terms. The petitioners contend non-compliance by EPFO constitutes willful disobedience and seek relief under Section 12 of the Contempt Act, arguing that the scheme changes and option rights must be enforced. They emphasize the need to ensure higher pension entitlements to those who are eligible under the post-amendment regime and pre- or post-September 2014 scenarios, as contemplated by the apex court’s interpretations.

Contentions of Respondents

The EPFO respondents contend that the 2022 Supreme Court judgment requires reconsideration of the petitioners’ entitlements rather than automatic enforcement of the earlier pension calculations. They assert the 2014 amendment notification is legal and valid, and the authorities must implement the modified Pension Scheme with proper adjustments. They maintain there has been no willful disobedience; instead, there is a legal obligation to revisit entitlements in light of the apex court’s guidance, and that the contempts should be disposed of with directions to undertake a lawful reconsideration exercise. They emphasize compliance within a defined period and/or as directed by the apex court’s judgments, without unduly prejudicing the fund’s finances.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B.AIR 2022 SC 5634; 2022 (7) KHC 12PositiveCited as the controlling Supreme Court judgment holding the 2014 amendment legal and valid; directs extension of options and readjustment of pension scheme in line with the post-2014 amendments.
R.C. Gupta and others v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, EPFO and others(2018) 14 SCC 809PositiveCited for interpretation of the pre-amendment paragraph 11(3) rights and the manner of exercising options; followed by the High Court in the context of the pension scheme transition.

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.2316 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 MR.JUSTICE G.GIRISH ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1945 ``` ``` CON.CASE(C) NO. 2316 OF 2019 ``` ``` ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.10.2018 IN WP(C)NO. 32461/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:`** ``` 1JANARDHANAN.K. AGED 52 YEARS ``` ``` PEON HIGHER GRADE, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 KANNAN NIVAS, KANNIKULANGARA, UDMA P.O. KASARGOD,EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/210. (PETITIONER NO. 1 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 2KUNHIRAMAN.M., AGED 54 YEARS ``` ``` S/O. RAMAN, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 MARADAN HOUSE, PUTHARIPADAM, KARAKOD P.O. MALAPPURAM, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/231. (PETITIONER NO. 2 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 3SAHTHEESAN E.S., AGED 48 YEARS S/O. SANNALIAN, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 ELAYIDATH, MAMPUZHA, KULAVETHIKKARA P.O. PATHANAMTHITTA 682 315. EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/323(PETITIONER NO 3 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016) ``` ``` 4SOUDHAMINI KHALID, AGED 60 YEARS W/O. SHAUL HAMID, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 CHARUVILAZHIKATHU VEEDU, NADKNNU TB JUNCTION, PATHANAPURAM P.O. 689 695, EPF A/C ``` 2 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ``` NO.KR/KCH/2257/328. (PETITIONER NO. 4 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 5SURENDRAN.C., AGED 56 YEARS S/O.M.T. CHELLAPPAN, SALES OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 MULAMOOTTIL THEKKEKARA, KZHIPUZHA NORTH P.O. KULANADA, PATHANAMTHITTA EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/172. (PETITIONER NO. 6 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 6RAJAN. V., AGED 58 YEARS S/O. G. VELAPPAN, ATTENDER, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20SABARI NIVAS, KODANGAVILA P.O. (VIA), ARALUMMODU, TRIVANDRUM, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/171. (PETITIONER NO. 7 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 7SANTHA.T., AGED 67 YEARS D/O. K. BALAN PILLAI, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/163. BINDU NIVAS, MARUTHANKUZHY, KANJIRAMPARA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (PETITIONER NO. 8 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 8SIVADASAN.N., AGED 52 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 NECHIKKUTH HOUSE, VATTALUR P.O. MEKKAPARAMBU, MALAPPURAM, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/326. (PETITIONER NO. 9 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016). ``` ``` 9JAYAMMA.M.V. AGED 62 YEARS D/O. VELAYUDHAN, PTC SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 MUKKATH, EROOR P.O. TRIPUNITHURA,EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/229. PETITIONER NO. 10 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 10RADHA.A.P. AGED 55 YEARS D/O. C.P. JAYAN, ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI ``` 3 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ``` NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 CHUNDUKULATH HOUSE, KUZHUPPALLY AYYAMPILLY ERNAKULAM, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/294. PETITIONER NO. 11 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 11PRABHAKARAN.P. AGED 60 YEARS S/O. T. MADHAVAN NAIR, FINANCE MANAGER I/C, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 CHANDRAKANTHAM, KARUVISSERY, CALICUT 673 010, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/132. PETITIONER NO. 12 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 12AJOY DAS, AGED 57 YEARS S/O. AMIYA KUMAR DAS, PEON HIGHER GRADE, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/213. HEM NIRA, 1/8C, NETAJI NAGAR, REGENT ESTAET P.O. KOLKAT 700 092, PETITIONER NO. 13 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 13MATHEW KUTTY K.K., AGED 60 YEARS S/O. K.U KURIAKOSE, BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 KIZHKKEPURATHU, KUNNACKAL P.O. MOOVATTUPUZHA, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/178. PETITIONER NO. 14 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 14GEETHA.CK., AGED 55 YEARS W/O. BABU.V.A ., ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 VETTIYATTIL HOUSE, CHEMBUKKAVU, TRICHUR 20, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/296. PETITIONER NO. 15 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 15SHIBU. T.P., AGED 53 YEARS S/O. T.M. PURUSHOTHAMAN, FIELD OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 THAZHATTHUMALAYIL HOUSE, CHEERUKUZHI P.O. THODUPUZHA,EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/330. PETITIONER NO. 16 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 16SABU. P.K., AGED 53 YEARS S/O. KARUNAKARAN, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE ``` 4 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ``` MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/228. PAADATHTHUNDIYIL HOUSE, KALOOR P.O. KATHRIKADAVU, KOCHI 682 017, PETITIONER NO. 17 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 17SIVAPRASAD T.K., AGED 56 YEARS ``` ``` S/O. T.G. KUTTAPPAN, MARKETING MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 PRAVANAM, 5/3179 A, U.K.S. ROAD, KOZHIKODE -1, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/224. PETITIONER NO. 18 IN PWC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 18MUHAMMED NOOHU P.N., AGED 57 YEARS ``` ``` S/O. NAINA ROWTHER, DRIVER, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 PERUNILATHU, THODUPUZHA EAST P.O. EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/314. PETITIONER NO. 19 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` - **`19 BALACHANDRAN.S.,`** ``` AGED 60 YEARS ``` ``` S/O. . SREEDHARAN PILLAI, BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 FLAT 1B, CHERYIL ENCLAVE, JUDGES AVENUE KALOOR, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/176. PETITIONER NO. 21 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` - **`20 NAJEEB.P.P., AGED 56 YEARS`** ``` S/O. P.A. PARED PILLAI, SALES OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 PALAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOONAMTHAI, EDAPPALLY P.O. COCHIN 682 024, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/221. PETITIONER NO. 22 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` - **`21 RAMANANDAN.E., AGED 58 YEARS`** ``` S/O. P. DIVAKARAN NAIR, REGIONAL MARKETING MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 NANDANAM, PATHAIKARA P.O. PERINTHALMANNA 679 322, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/203. PETITIONER NO. 23 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 22PRADEEP KUMAR. V.P., AGED 60 YEARS S/O. LATE SRI. P.K. GOVINDAN, ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 GOVINDAM, ``` 5 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ``` KANNOOKARA P.O. NADAGARA, CALICUT 673 102, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/154. PETITIONER NO. 24 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 23JAMES JOSEPH, AGED 57 YEARS S/O. JOSEPH, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 THOTTAKUZHIYIL, POOVANTHURUTHU POST, KOTTAYAM, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/230 PETITIONER NO. 25 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 24LALITHAMBIKA P.D., AGED 59 YEARS W/O.K.N. KRISHNANKUTTY, ACCOUNTANT, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 VIKAS BHAVAN, KOOTHATTUKULAM P.O. ERNAKULAM, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/329. PETITIONER NO. 26 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 25SUSEELA.T.C, AGED 57 YEARS W/O. A.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 MANAYATHKADU HOUSE, AYYAPYAMPILLY P.O. ERNAKULAM, 682 EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/293. PETITIONER NO. 27 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 26VIJAYAN.P., AGED 57 YEARS S/O. P. PARAMESHWARAN PILLAI, ATTENDER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 ASWATHY, KANNANKARAM, ARUVIKKARA (VIA) KARAKULAM, TRIVANDRUM 695 564, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/187. PETITIONER NO. 28 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 27GAYATHRI.S., AGED 34 YEARS W/O. PRASANTH.P. SENIOR CLERK, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20PRAYAGA, PUTHOORKONAM, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 013. EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/327. PETITIONER NO. 29 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 28RAMPATHY YADAV, AGED 52 YEARS S/O. RAMJANAM YADAV. ATTENDER, KERALA STATE CO- OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 H.NO. 38, JAGADISHPUR, THAJPUR, MANHA, GHASIPUR, 232 340, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/202. PETITIONER NO. 30 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` 6 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ``` 29ARUMUGHAM NELLAYI PARAMBIL, AGED 61 YEARS S/O. KUTTAPPA NELLAYIPARAMBIL BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20B. 15, SHANKER GARDEN, VIKAS PURI, NEW DELHI 110 018, EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/121. PETITIONER NO. 31 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 30SASI.P.C., AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.K.V. CHATHAN, ATTENDER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI- 20 ,PATTUKALATHILVADAKKE CHARUVIL, KAIPUZHA NORTH, KULANADA , PATHNAMTHITTA EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/169. PETITIONER NO. 32 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 31JAYAPRAKSH.T., AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. KESAVAN NAMBOODIRI, TYPIST, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20 EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/186. THAZHEKKAD PODUVAL HOUSE, KALLETTUMKARA P.O. TRICHUR, PETITIONER NO. 33 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` 32SAJEEVAN.C.K, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. C.K. GOPALAN, PEON , KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHARA P.O., KOCHI-20SAJI VIHAR, KOYILANDY POST, KOZHIKODE, , EPF A/C NO.KR/KCH/2257/313. PETITIONER NO. 34 IN WPC NO. 32461/2016. ``` ``` BY ADVS.SRI.K.SASIKUMAR SRI.S.ARAVIND ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/4[TH] RESPONDENT :`** ``` B.ANDREW PRABHU AGED AND SON OF NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, ASSISTANT P.F. COMMISSIONER NOW UP GRATED TO REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSION, EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, NO. 36/685-A, BHAVISHYANITHI BHAVAN, P.B. 1895, KALOOR, KOCHI 682 017. ``` ``` R BY ADV.SMT.NITHA N.S. ``` ``` THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY ``` ``` DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 7 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ## **JUDGMENT** Anil K. Narendran, J. The petitioners, who are the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.32461 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 I 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 Apex Court dated 04.11.2022 read as follows: “44. We accordingly hold and direct:- 8 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 (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 scheme as it stood before 1[st] September 2014 did not provide for any cut-off date and thus those members shall 9 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 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, 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 salary exceeds Rs.15,000/per month as an additional contribution under the amended scheme is held to be ultra 10 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 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 the learned Standing Counsel for the Employees Provident Fund 11 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 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/- **G. GIRISH, JUDGE** AV/10/11 12 Cont.Case (C)No.2316 of 2019 ## **`APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2316/2019`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` ANNEXURE 1A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WPC NO. 32461/2016 DATED 12.10.2018. ANNEXURE IIA TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT OPTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TOGETHER ENDORSED BY THE EMPLOYER. ```