High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeDisposed of

R. Chandrika Devi and others v. Employees' Provident Fund Organisation and others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Murali Purushothaman
Judgment Date
2023-08-24
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is disposed of directing the competent among the respondents to reconsider the petitioners' claims in light of the Supreme Court dictum in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B, within three months from receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Final Disposition
Disposed of

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • R. Chandrika Devi
  • B. Sarojini Amma
  • S. Leelabai
  • S. N. Geethakumari
  • Rajappan
  • V. J. Jose
  • K. Leelavathy
  • M. C. Mathews
  • M. R. Radhamony
  • K. Prabhakaran Pillai
  • P. C. Divakaran
  • Sarojini K
  • S Indira Devi
  • K. Radhama
  • P. Rajeeve Kumar
  • Gopikrishnan M
  • C. Balakrishnan Nair

Respondents

  • Employees' Provident Fund Organisation
  • The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension) — Employees' Provident Fund Organisation
  • Kerala State Cooperative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • B. Ashok Shenoy
  • • Smt. C. G. Preetha
  • • Sri K. V. George
  • • Sri P. N. Rajagopalan Nair
  • • Sri P. S. Gireesh
  • • Sri Riyal Devassy
  • • Shri. Dr. Abhilash O. U.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • M. A. Asif

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition challenges pension computation under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995, filed by 17 retired employees of the Kerala State Cooperative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. The petitioners, subscribers to the Employees' Provident Fund, contend they are entitled to higher pension under the 1995 scheme calculated on their actual monthly salary, not the capped ceiling, and seek back credits to the Pension Fund at 8.33% of salary with arrears from retirement. They assert that the option exercised by them for enhanced pension must govern pensionable benefits and that para 11(3) of the Pension Scheme should not restrict their pension. The 1st respondent, EPFO, represented by the Standing Counsel, counters that the issue is settled by the Supreme Court in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B. (2022), and that the petition should be resolved following that dictum. The High Court disposes of the petition by directing the competent respondents to reconsider the petitioners' claims in light of the Supreme Court decision, within three months. The judgment thus blends a direction for reconsideration with respect for the controlling Supreme Court ruling, rather than granting a blanket mandamus, ensuring compliance with the interpretive framework laid down in Sunil Kumar B.

Provisions of Law Cited

Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that as retired employees and subscribers to the Employees' Provident Fund, they are entitled to higher pension under the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995, calculated on the actual monthly salary without a ceiling, and that back credits of Pension Fund contributions at 8.33% of actual salary with no maximum cap should be provided, along with arrears from retirement. They assert that the option exercised by them for enhanced pension must govern the pensionable benefits and that para 11(3) of the Pension Scheme should not restrict their pension. They seek mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to credit and revise pension accordingly. They rely on the EPF Act and the Pension Scheme, and on prior favorable judgments supporting higher pension amounts.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents' counsel submitted that the issue is settled by the Supreme Court in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B (2022), and the petition should be resolved in light of that decision. They urged disposal of the petition by applying the Supreme Court dictum rather than granting a blanket mandamus, and that any back credits and revision should follow the framework laid down in the cited decision.

Cited Precedents (5)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
EPF Organisation and Another v. Sunil Kumar B and Others2022 SCC online SC 1521PositiveThe High Court explicitly states the issue is settled by this Supreme Court decision, and the petition must be decided according to its dictum.
Judgment dated 3.3.2015 in WP(C) NO.6590 OF 2015WP(C) 6590 of 2015Mentioned OnlyCited as Exhibit P2; judgment is referenced but not discussed.
Judgment dated 4.11.2011 in WP(C) Nos 6643 and 9929 of 20076643 of 2007 and 9929 of 2007Mentioned OnlyCited as Exhibit P3; referenced without analysis.
Judgment dated 16.10.2014 of WA No.1442 of 2014WA 1442 of 2014Mentioned OnlyCited as Exhibit P4; referenced but not discussed.
Order dated 1.4.2019 of the Supreme Court of India in SLP (Civil) Diary No 9610 of 2019SLP (Civil) Diary No 9610 of 2019Mentioned OnlyCited as Exhibit P5; referenced without adjudication.

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 R. Chandrika Devi and others v. Employees' Provident Fund Organisation and others 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 MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN THURSDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 2ND BHADRA, 1945** ## **WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020** ## **PETITIONERS:** 1 R.CHANDRIKA DEVI AGED 70 YEARS WIFE OF KRISHNA PILLAI, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, RESIDING AT TC 50/313(6), NANDANA BHAVAN, KALADY SOUTH, KARAMANA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002. 2 B SAROJINI AMMA AGED 67 YEARS DAUGHTER OF G.BHARGAVI AMMA, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,RESIDING AT 50/442(6), GOURI SANKARAM, KALADY, KARAMANA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695002. 3 S.LEELABAI AGED 77 YEARS DAUGHTER OF SARASWATHI AMMA, RETIRED,KERALA STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,RESIDING AT ANUGRAHA, CRA 34, NEAR PALKULANGARA POST OFFICE, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695024. 4 S.N. GEETHAKUMARI AGED 63 YEARS WIFE OF LATE N.VIJAYAKUMARAN NAIR, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,RESIDING AT GEETHANJALI, MAHATMA ROAD, MNRA 29/1, TC 50/73(1), KALADY, KARAMANA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002. - 5 RAJAPPAN AGED 63 YEARS S/O. LATE MADHAVAN, DRIVER,KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,RESIDING AT SREE SHYLAM, ELLUKALAYIL HOUSE, MADATHIPADY, THACHAKUNNU, PUTHUPPALLY P O, KOTTAYAM-686011. 6 V.J. JOSE AGED 52 YEARS ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 2 ``` SON OF JOSEPH, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD,REGIONAL OFFICE, CHERUTHONI, IDUKKI-685602, RESIDING AT VARAKIL HOUSE, IDUKKI COLONY P O, CHERUTHONI, IDUKKI-685602. 7 K.LEELAVATHY AGED 63 YEARS WIFE OF RAMACHANDRAN, PART TIME SWEEPER KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, KALPATTA, WAYANAD-673121, RESIDING AT CHITHRA NIVAS, PULIYARMALAM KALPETTA NORTH-673122. 8 M.C MATHEWS AGED 55 YEARS SON OF MATHEW CHERIYAN M.C, DEPUTY MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, RESIDING AT 16/359, MADHAVAPPALLIL, PLEASANT STREET, KALVAKULAM, KOPPAM, PALAKKAD687001. 9 M.R RADHAMONY AGED 59 YEARS WIFE OF M.R SREEKUMAR, RETIRED DEPUTY MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001, RESIDING AT PRANAVAM, BUDHANOOR P O, CHENGANOOR, ALLEPPEY - 689510 10 K. PRABHAKARAN PILLAI AGED 55 YEARS SON OF G. KUNJUPILLAI KURUP, ASSISTANT MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE KOLLAM-691001, RESIDING AT THEAGUVILA VEEDU, KADAYOOR, PERINAD P O, KOLLAM-691001. 11 P.C. DIVAKARAN AGED 58 YEARS SON OF P.C. KUNHAPPA NAMBIAR, ATTENDER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, INSPECTION WING, NORTH ZONE, KANNUR-670012, RESIDING ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 3 ``` AT DEVARAGAM, PARIYARAM, KOLARI P.O, VIA MATTANNUR, KANNUR-670702. 12 SAROJINI K AGED 72 YEARS WIFE OF NARAYANAN V, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, INSPECTION WING, NORTH ZONE, KANNUR-670012, RESIDING AT KELOTH HOUSE, VARAM, VARAM P O, KANNUR670594. 13 S INDIRA DEVI AGED 70 YEARS DAUGHTER OF K.S MADHAVAN PILLAI, RETIRED, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695001, RESIDING AT RAKHENDU, TC 92/2483, MERA-09, ANAYARA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695029. 14 K. RADHAMA AGED 60 YEARS WIFE OF CHANDRAN, PART TIME SWEEPER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, KOLLAM-691001, RESIDING AT KALARIPURAYIDOM, KOTTAMUKKU, KOLLAM-691001. 15 P. RAJEEVE KUMAR, AGED 59 YEARS SON OF G.P. NAIR, RETIRED LAW OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, RESIDING AT SREELEKSHMY, SANTHIVILA, NEMOM P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695020 16 GOPIKRISHNAN M AGED 63 YEARS SON OF R.M. KUMAR, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001, REISIDNG AT PADMAVILASOM BUNGLOW, VEDIVANCHANKOVIL, VIA BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695501 17 C. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR AGED 74 YEARS SON OF KUNHAMBU NAIR, REGIONAL MANAGER, ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 4 ``` KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR-670002, RESIDING AT VAISHAKH, BEHIND OLD KAILAS THEATRE, DURGA HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, KAUHAUGAD P O, KASARAGOD671531. BY ADVS. B.ASHOK SHENOY SMT.C.G.PREETHA SRI.K.V.GEORGE SRI.P.N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR SRI.P.S.GIREESH SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY SHRI.DR.ABHILASH O.U. ## **RESPONDENTS:** - 1 EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004. - 2 THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER(PENSION) EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004. - 3 KERALA STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE, P B NO.56, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. BY ADV M.A.ASIF ## **OTHER PRESENT:** SMT. NITA.N.S **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 5 ``` ## **JUDGMENT** ## This writ petition is filed seeking the following ## reliefs:- “a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1[st] respondent to receive back and credit to Employees Pension Fund, Employees’ Pension contributions in respect of the petitioners, at the rate of 8.33% of their actual monthly salary without any ceiling or limits, entitling them to draw monthly pension based on their actual monthly salary without any ceiling or limits; b) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1[st] and 2[nd] respondents to re-fix and revise the monthly pension in respect of petitioners, reckoning their actual monthly salary without any ceiling/limit and pay the petitioners, revised pension thereof, with arrears from their respective dates of retirement; and c) Grant any other and further reliefs as are deemed just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case including the costs of this proceedings; as also the following; ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 6 ``` 2. The petitioners are retired employees of the 3[rd] respondent establishment. They are subscribers of Employees’ Provident Fund. According to the petitioners, they are entitled for higher pension under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 as per the option exercised by them. It is their case that the pension has to be paid without limiting the amount to the maximum pensionable salary prescribed in paragraph 11(3) of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995. 3. Smt. Nita N.S., the learned Standing Counsel for the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation submits that the question raised in the writ petition is now settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in **EPF Organisation and Another v. Sunil Kumar B and Others** [2022 SCC online SC 1521] and that the grievance of the ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 7 ``` petitioners raised in this writ petition will be considered in accordance with the directions therein. In the light of the said submission, this writ petition is disposed of directing the competent among the respondents to re-consider the claims put forward by the petitioners in the light of the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision cited above within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. **Sd/-** **MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE** AL/- ``` WP(C) NO. 4350 OF 2020 ``` ``` 8 ``` ## _`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4350/2020`_ ## _`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`_ |_`EXHIBIT P1`_|_`TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER`_| |---|---| ||_`NO.KR/TVM/PENSION/2015/1254 DATED`_| ||_`8.7.2015 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO`_| ||_`12TH PETITIONER.`_| |_`EXHIBIT P1(A)`_|_`TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER`_| ||_`NO. KR/KNR/PENSION/04 DATED`_| ||_`15.09.2004 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT`_| ||_`TO 17TH PETITIONER.`_| |_`EXHIBIT P2`_|_`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED`_| ||_`3.3.2015 IN WP(C) NO.6590 OF 2015`_| ||_`BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT.`_| |_`EXHIBIT P3`_|_`TRUE COPY JUDGMENT DATED 4.11.2011`_| ||_`IN WP(C) NOS 6643 AND 9929 OF 2007`_| ||_`BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT.`_| |_`EXHIBIT P4`_|_`TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED`_| ||_`16.10.2014 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN`_| ||_`WA NO.1442 OF 2014.`_| |_`EXHIBIT P5`_|_`TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 1.4.2019 OF`_| ||_`THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA`_| ||_`IN SLP (CIVIL) DIARY NO 9610 OF`_| ||_`2019.`_| |_`EXHIBIT P6`_|_`TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.`_| ||_`KR/TVM/1914/400/ AB1(1)/2019/3872`_| ||_`DATED 13.12.2.2019 ISSUED BY 1ST`_| ||_`RESPONDENT TO 11TH PETITIONER.`_|