EPS 95 PENSIONERS LATEST UPDATE FORM IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM IMPORTANT & LATEST JUDGMENT – FCI EMPLOYEES

Search EPS 95 Pensioners Cases Upcoming Hearing Detail In Supreme Court Below

In this article I am sharing, herewith, copies of the three very recent judgments of Kerala High Court for EPS 95 Pensioners Information as under:

1) WP(C) no. 16408 of 2019 order dt. 6/7/2020
2) WP(C) no. 13935 of 2020 order dt. 10/7/2020
3) WP(C) no. 14012 of 2020 order dt.10/7/2020

All the above three have been merged and are being shared in one Pdf, out of 3 judgments only one is given below rest two can be download from link given below.

Text of the judgment dt. 6.7.2020 in WP(C) no. 16408 of 2019 relating to FCI employees is being reproduced below for ready reference.

JUDGMENT
WP(C).No.16408 OF 2019(A)
Dated this the 6th day of July 2020

Petitioners are employees of the Food Corporation of India and they are working as DPS (Direct Payment System) workers. They are members of the Employee's Pension Scheme, 1995 framed under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. They are provided with Universal Account Numbers maintained by the Provident Fund Authorities. Their contribution, along with employer's contribution to the Provident Fund is made on the basis of the actual salary, without limiting the contribution on the basis of fixed salary of Rs.6,500/- per month. Petitioners are praying following reliefs in this petition.

• (i) to declare that the petitioners are similarly situated as the petitioners in Ext.P1 judgment and are entitled to the same reliefs as allowed therein;
• (ii) to declare that the petitioners are entitled to get pension on the basis of pensionable salary reckoned in accordance with their actual salary from the dates of their joining the Pension Scheme under the employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952;
• (iii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 7th respondent to transfer such percentage of employers contribution from the respective Provident Fund Account of the petitioners to their respective Employees Pension Fund with the arrears of contribution payable by them, based on their actual salary ie, Basic + DA, ignoring the ceiling prescribed in Paragraph 11(3) of the Employees Pension Scheme, and directing respondents 2 to 5 to accept the same when thus transfer along with joint option;
• (iv) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 2 to 5 to pay to the petitioners, pension reckoning their actual salary as pensionable with retrospective effect, accepting from the petitioners the excess amount of contribution they ought to have paid to the Pension Fund as contribution calculating the same on the basis of their actual salary.

2. Petitioners' claim is based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Sankaranarayanan. N.S Vs. Union of India and others decided on 12/10/2018, as well as judgment in
the matter of P.Sasikumar and Others Vs. Union of India reported in [ILR 2019 (1) Kerala 614]. It is reported that judgment in the matter of P.Sasikumar and others (supra) is already affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition filed by the Employees' Provident Fund Organization.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case of the petitioners is exactly identical with that of the petitioners in WP(C) No. 34284/2016 in Sankaranarayanan. N.S Vs. Union of
India and others. It is further argued that the issue is covered by the judgment of this Court in the matter of P.Sasikumar and Others (supra) and therefore, the petition needs to be allowed.

4. As against this, the learned standing counsel for the Employees' Provident Fund Organization submitted that the review petition has already been filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Government of India has also preferred the SLP and it is directed to be fixed for hearing along with the Revision Petition. With this, it is argued by the learned counsel for the Employee's Provident Fund Organization that the petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. I have carefully considered the submission in advance and also perused judgments of this Court cited above. I am of the considered opinion that the issue raised in the instant petition is squarely covered by both these judgments. As of now, there are concluded judgments on the issue involved in the instant petition.

Therefore, respondents are duty bound to initiate action for re-determination of the pension in the light of directions given in the aforesaid decisions. In this view of the matter, the petition stands allowed in terms of prayer clauses (i) to (iv).

Respondents are directed to do the needful within a period of four months. However, the consequent action shall be subject to any proceedings pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The instant petition is accordingly disposed of.
sd/-
A.M.BADAR
JUDGE

Click Here to Download Judgments of Kerala High Court