J U D G M E N T
The petitioners 1 to 5 who are retired employees and petitioners 6 to 15 who are serving employees of the 5threspondent have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs;
"(i) To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other Writ or Order calling for the records leading to Exhibit P2 and quash to that extend of it COURT OF rejecting the joint option submitted by petitioners 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,13,& 14 and Orders issued to the 2nd, 11th and 15th petitioners while exhibit P3, P4 & P5 respectively and quash the same;
(ii). To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or Order directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to accept petitioners online joint option and allow the enhanced pension. (iii). To Declare that the Exhibit P2,P3,P4 & P5 are issued in violations of the statutory provision16A of EPS 1995 and 14B of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act 1952."
2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Employees Provident Fund Organization would submit that in order to calculate the entitlement of the petitioners for higher pension, the details of bulk payment made by the employer, amounting to Rs.40,03,150/- and 13,12,563/- [for the period from 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 credited in the month of November 2006 and March, 2008] in respect of all units have to be made available. It
4
is submitted that the bulk payment was made on 16-11-2006 and 16-03-2008. It is submitted that, unless the month-wise details of the payment which will identify the member in whose favour the payment is made, the month and year to which payment relates, the employer contribution and the employee contribution and the contribution to the pension scheme, it will be impossible for the Provident Fund Organization to calculate the entitlement of the individual petitioners. It is also submitted that the salary details of the petitioners have also to be produced.
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in this writ petition and the learned counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organization, I am of the opinion that the learned counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organization is right in contending that unless the details mentioned above are made available by the employer, it might not be possible for the Provident Fund Organization to calculate the benefits payable to each of the individual petitioners or others, who may not have approached this Court. The 5threspondent had made the payment in bulk [for the period from 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 credited in the month of November 2006 and March, 2008] on account of the fact that the contribution was not made on the basis of actual salary and was made on a lesser amount and was subject to statutory limits.
5
4. Therefore, the writ petition will stand disposed of, directing the 5th respondent to provide the following details to the Provident Fund Organization within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment :-
(i) The month-wise break up of the bulk amount;
(ii) The identity of the member and the month and year to which the payment relates;
(iii) The amount representing the employer contribution and the employee contribution of each of the persons concerned;
(iv) The amount of contribution to the pension Scheme; and
(v) Salary details of the individuals concerned. On receipt of the aforesaid details from the 5threspondent, the Competent Authority of the Provident Fund Organization shall reconsider the options submitted by the petitioners, without undue delay and within a period of two months from the date on which the details are made available by the 5th respondent. In order to enable re-consideration, Exhibit P2 and similar orders rejecting the options filed by the petitioners will stand set aside. Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
AMG
6