EPS 95 pension latest news

This is a post from the pen of Narayana Gupta, a senior EPS 95 pension analyst from Hyderabad.
DT : 09/07/25.

Join Our WhatsApp Group

From:
G Narayana,
narayana.fic@gmail.com
To
The Minister of Labour and Employment,
New Delhi.
To
The Central Provident Fund Commissioner,
EPFO, New Delhi.
To,
The CBT Member,
Employees Provident Fund Organization,
Central Board of Trustees, New Delhi.
Honorable sir,
Sub: Request for considering higher EPS pension for pre 01 09 14 retirees as per RC Gupta judgement in the coming CBT meeting: reg.
I would like to bring to your kind notice the following very important points for your kind consideration in the coming CBT meeting.

The Higher EPS pension has been allowed in the RC Gupta judgement of supreme court during 2016.

In the judgement it is said that the Higher EPS pension can be opted even after retirement but only on payment of differential PF and intrest.

In the 04/11/22 judgement of Sunil Kumar B, of supreme court the following are the verdicts.

Page 3 para 2

*In this judgement we shall deal with the legality of certain amendments and modifications made by Central government to the employees pension scheme 1995.*

It means to examine the GSR 609 E which is applicable to post 01 09 14 retirees only but not applicable to pre 01 09 14 retirees.

Para 17 page 22

*It was also observed in this judgement that a beneficial scheme ought not to be allowed to be defeated by reference to a cut off date in a situation where employer was not following the ceiling limit of RS 5000/- or RS 6500/- and had deposited 12% of actual salary.*

As per this all the employees who’s Provident Fund has been deposited 12% on actual salary are eligible for higher EPS pension irrespective of pension contribution on ceiling wages.

The para 19 Page 23

*The division bench of Kerala High court examined the impact of amendment to the pension scheme in respect of the following 4 classes of employees*

1) The employees who had exercised option under para 11 (3) and continued in service as on 01 09 14.

2) 1) The employees who had NOT exercised option under para 11 (3) and continued in service as on 01 09 14.

3) The employees retired prior to 01 09 14 without exercising option under para 11 (3) of the EPS pension scheme.

It means those who have to retire after 01 09 14 but voluntarily retired prior to 01 09 14 without exercising the option .

4) The employees who have to retire on or after 01 09 14 but retired prior to 01 09 14 on exercising option under para 11 (3) of the EPS pension scheme.

It means those who have to retire after 01 09 14 but voluntarily retired prior to 01 09 14 on exercising the option .

So all these 4 clases of Retirees comes under post 01 09 14 retirees but don’t fall under pre 01 09 14 retirees category.

The same categories have been mentioned in judgement para 44 iii to 44 vi which includes para 44 v.

In main para 44 i

It is clearly said that:

*We accordingly hold and direct : -*

*The provisions contained in the NOTIFICATION NO. GSR 609 E dated 22/08/14 are legal and valid. Sofar as the 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 SUB- PARAGRAPS.*

The SUB PARAS 44 iii to vi are the directions of the judgement on Amendment vide GSR 609 E similar to Kerala High court observations made at para no 19 (1) to 19 (4.)

Clarification.

Purpose of the judgement is mentioned in para 44 i but guidelines for implementing the para 44 i are given vide sub paras iii to vi in para 44.

Sub para 44 v alone will not give any meaning. Para 44 v are to be read with para 44 i. Then only the meaning will be complete.

When the para 2 of the judgement clearly said that the bench is dealing with legality of certain amendments.

And the in the para 44 i it is said that the provisions contained in the GSR 609 E are legal and valid.

And when in the para 44 i it is also said the judgement is for *present members,*

When in SUB PARA 44 ii it is said it is applicable to *EMPLOYEES* of exempted establiments.

How can this *SUB PARA 44 V* is applicable to pre 01 09 14 retirees.?

It means those who have to retire after 01 09 14 but voluntarily retired prior to 01 09 14 without exercising the option .

Para 41 page 44 & 45.

*As we have already discussed in case of RC Gupta (supra) , it has been specifically held that there was no cut off date provisio to paragraph 11 (3) as it stood before amendment.*

*In our opinion the interpretation given to the proviso to para 11 (3) prior to 2014 amendment does not require any reconsideration.*

*We agree with the reasoning of two judge bench of this court on this point as expressed in the said judgement.*

*As there was no cut off date to be contemplated prior to the 2014 amendment limiting the entitlement of enhanced pension covering to those employees only who had excecised an option under clause 11 3 of the un umended scheme would be contrary to the ratio of the decision of this court held in the case of RC GUPTA ( supra).*

*As held in the case of RC Gupta there was no time limit for exercising such option.*

Para 44 ix page 50

*We agree with the view taken by the division bench in the case of RC Gupta ( supra) so far as the interpretation of the proviso to para 11 3 (pre amended ) of pension scheme is concerned.*

*The fund authorities shall implement the directives contained in the said judgement with in a period of 8 weeks.*

Conclusion.

*There was no negativity of pre 01 09 14 retirees neither in the review petition nor in the judgement.*

*The RC Gupta judgement was a land mark judgement which allowed higher EPS pension.*

*The Sunil Kumar B judgement of supreme court upheld the RC Gupta judgement and clarified in favour of pre 01 09 14 retirees vide para numbers , 2, 19, 44.*

*The para 41 it is very clearly mentioned that the pre 01 09 14 retirees are eligible for higher EPS pension without any cut off date as there was no cut off date prior to the amended scheme.*

*And ordered to implement the scheme with in 8 weeks on 04 11 22.*

*Respected sir it is 3 years are going to be completed shortly but the RC Gupta judgement not implemented sofar.*

*My humble request to take a decision in the coming CBT meeting to implement RC Gupta judgement in toto for the pre 01 09 14 retirees immediately.*

*Please do justice while you can do it. Tomorrow you may not be there in the post or otherwise even if you want to do justice.*

Yours faithfully

G Narayana
VC FCIREWA TS AND AP
ADVISOR : EPS JAC AP AND TS,
MEMBER: National Confederation of Retirees.

Join Our Telegram Group