Sasikumar C. Gandhi Nagar and Others v. Union of India and Others
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
- Judgment Date
- 2023-08-22
- Court Decision / Holding
- This writ petition is disposed of with directions. The competent among the respondents are directed to re-consider the petitioners’ claims in light of the Supreme Court’s dictum in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B and Others (2022) within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
- Final Disposition
- Petition disposed of with directions to reconsider the petitioners’ claims in light of the Supreme Court judgment within three months from receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- SASIKUMAR C.
- GANDHI NAGAR, MAYAPPALAM, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000040, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00063097.
- KANAKASARMAN T. THAZHATHE HOUSE, VENOLI, PUTHUSSERY P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 623, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000127, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00067849.
- RAMESH S. MELA HOUSE, NEDUMPALLAM, VENGODI P.O., PALAKKAD, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000150, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00070718.
- RAVINDRAN K. CHEMATTIAPADAM, KODUMBU P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 551, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000091, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00066032.
- KANNANKUTTY C. KURUNGADE HOUSE, NEAR PUDUSSERY SCHOOL, PUDUSSERY P.O., PALAKKAD, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000144, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00066057.
- BALAKRISHNAN K.V. BHARADWAJ, NEW KALPATHI, PALAKKAD - 678 003, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/000090, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00066033.
- MOHAN K. B/47, UPASANA, BANGALAPARAMBU, KANJIKODE EAST P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000053, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00063095.
- MOHANDASAN R. KULATHINGAL HOUSE, NAIR THARA, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000098, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00063252.
- SREENIVASAN K. 16/336, PALLIKANDATHIL HOUSE, KUNNATHUR MEDU P.O., PALAKKAD, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000060
- PANKAJAKSHAN M.S. USHAS (G35), GANDHI NAGAR, CHANDRANAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD - 678007, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000062, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00063633.
- RADHAKRISHNAN S. MAMPULLY HOUSE, PADINJAREKKAD, CHULLIMADA, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000128, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00068346.
- RAVINDRAN K. 16/170, PADINJARE VEEDU, KALLEPPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 005, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000054, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00070523.
- PRAKASAN A. DEEPAM, MUTHANODE, KAVASSERY P.O., ALATHUR, PALAKKAD - 678 543, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000050, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00068832.
- BALAKRISHNAN C. PULINCHODU, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000089, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00059854.
- NARAYANAN R. 2/131, UMMUNIKULAM, KANJIKODE WEST P.O., PUDUSSERY, PALAKKAD -678 623, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000106, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00065738.
- VELAYUDHAN A. SURYA NAGAR, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000042, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00051058.
- GEORGE N.P. NADUVILA VEEDU, NEAR KTC, KANIKODE EAST P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/000012, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00031770.
- RAVI V. AMRUTHA, ELAPULLY THARA, ELAPPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 622, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000049, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00057909.
- KRISHNASWAMY N.
- 2/13
- KUTTIKRISHNAN A. BANGLAW PARAMBU, KANJIKODE WEST, PALAKKAD - 678 621, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000092, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00067231.
- MOSSES T.SHOMBY MALLIYAKKAL HOUSE, KANJIKODE WEST, PALAKKAD -678 623, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000088, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/00067116.
- SELVARAJ M. 18/469, PRECOT MILL, NEW COLONY, KANJIKODE WEST, PALAKKAD - 678 623, PF A/C NO.KR/KKD/0004915/000/0000021, P.P.O.NO.KR/KKD/120700003553.
Respondents
- Union of India (UOI) represented by the Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour and Department of Employment, New Delhi - 110 001
- Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO), Bhavishanidhi Bhavan, Pattom Palace, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN – 695 004
- Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Bhavishandhi Bhavan, Eranjipalams, Kozhikode - 673 006
- Employees Provident Fund Trustee represented by Managing Trustee, EPFO, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan, Wazirpur, New Delhi -110 052
- Provident Fund Commissioner-1 (Pension) Bhavishya Nithi Bhavan, 14-Bhikaji Cama Palace, New Delhi - 110 066
- Saint Gobain India Pvt. Ltd., (SEPR India) represented by Managing Director, Kanjikode West, Palakkad - 678 623
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • P.N.MOHANAN
- • SRI.C.P.SABARI
- • SMT.AMRUTHA SURESH
Counsels for Respondents
- • SRI.T.V.VINU
- • CGC DR.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
- • SC, EPF ORG
Case Synopsis & Summary
This writ petition (WP(C) No.17627/2020) is filed by twenty-two retired employees of the petitioner's establishment, who are subscribers to the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO). They seek a writ of mandamus or appropriate relief directing the EPFO to collect pension contributions towards the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995, based on the actual salary drawn by them, from the date of joining the pension scheme, and to revise pension in light of a prior judgment (Ext.P6). They argue that the pension must be calculated on actual salary rather than being restricted by the maximum pensionable salary prescribed in paragraph 11(3) of the EPS, 1995. The petition contends that their pension entitlement should reflect the salary actually drawn, as permitted by the proviso to Clause 11(3). The respondents, including the Union of India, EPFO, and the employer Saint-Gobain India Pvt. Ltd., counter that the matter is now settled by the Supreme Court in EPF Organisation and Another v. Sunil Kumar B and Others (2022 SCC Online SC 1521), and that the petition should be considered in light of that decision. The court, after hearing, disposed of the petition, directing the competent respondents to re-consider the petitioners’ claims in light of the Supreme Court dictum within three months from receipt of a copy of the judgment, thereby providing a structured path for resolution.
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners contend that pension under the EPS, 1995 must be computed on the actual salary drawn, and not restricted by the maximum pensionable salary prescribed in paragraph 11(3). They rely on the relevant provisions of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and EPS, 1995, arguing that pension contributions from the date of joining the pension scheme should be based on actual salary, with proper revision as per Ext.P6 judgment. They seek mandamus to direct the second, third and sixth respondents to implement this. They also seek a declaratory relief that pension contributions should be calculated on actual salary.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents submit that the issue is settled by the Supreme Court in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar B and Others (2022 SCC Online SC 1521). They urge reconsideration strictly in accordance with the Supreme Court’s dictum. They contend that the petitioners’ grievance should be addressed in light of that decision and that the Court should direct the concerned authorities to re-evaluate the claims accordingly.
Cited Precedents (6)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| EPF Organisation and Another v. Sunil Kumar B and Others | 2022 SCC Online SC 1521 | Positive | Cited as the controlling Supreme Court authority; the court states the matter is settled by this decision and directs reconsideration consistent with its dicta. |
| W.P.(C) No.6643/2007 | W.P.(C) No.6643/2007 | Mentioned Only | Referenced as an earlier judgment in the Appendix; no explicit treatment or incorporation into the reasoning is stated. |
| I.L.R.2019(1)KER614 | ILR 2019 (1) Ker 614 (WP(C) 13120/2015) | Mentioned Only | Cited in Appendix as Exhibit P6A; no direct application explained in the text. |
| Supreme Court SLP(Civil) Diary No.11023/2019 | SLP(Civil) Diary No.11023/2019 | Mentioned Only | Annexure reference to Supreme Court order; not discussed as governing principle in the judgment. |
| SLP NO.9610/2019 | SLP No.9610/2019 | Mentioned Only | Annexed as Exhibit; no direct analytical treatment in the judgment. |
| SLP NO.7074/2014 | SLP No.7074/2014 | Mentioned Only | Exhibited order; referenced without explicit treatment in the core reasoning. |
Diagnostic Tool
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 Sasikumar C. Gandhi Nagar and Others v. Union of India and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.