EPS Pension Judgment

This agony from the pen of G. Narayana. A Senior EPS 95 Pension Analyst

*EPFO MIS GUIDING THE HIGH COURTS AND THE SUPREME COURT AGAINST THE PRE 01 09 14 RETIREES.*

*CLARIFICATION TO PARA 44 (V) BY PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 28/03/25.*

*PART V*

*AN ANALYSIS BY*
*G NARAYANA.*
*M.Com, PGDPA, PGDPR, DCA.*

*There is no negativity of pre 01 09 14 retirees in 04/11/22 judgement. But the 04 11 22 judgement endorsed the RC Gupta judgement for pre 01 09 14 retirees.*

*But clarification was not provided in the para 44 v of 04 11 22 judgement which EPFO is mis interpreting to EPS pensioners and mis guiding the High courts and the supreme court.*

*The punjab and haryana High court has given number of judgements in favour of pre 01 09 14 retirees of EPS pension after 04/11/22 judgement of supreme court.*

*But despite number of judgements in favour of EPS pensioners, lot of writ petitions were filed in panjab and haryana High court due to rejection of joint options by EPFO for pre 01 09 14 retirees.*

*And also EPFO repeatedly going for appeals for higher bench in the Punjab and Haryana High court.*

*In view of the number of writ petitions and also to avoid repeated appeals by EPFO the Panjab and Haryana High court has also given a land mark judgement dated 28/03/25 explaining the para 44 v which was not clarified by the supreme court.*

*The Punjab and Haryana High court has clarified that the following are eligibility factors for pension on Higher Wages for pre 01 09 14 retirees at para 63 of 28/03/25 judgement.*

*To be eligible for higher EPS pension a pre 01 09 14 retiree should fulfill the following conditions.*

*1) One should have been a member of EPS Pension 95 scheme.*

*2) He should have contributed to PROVIDENT FUND on actual salary.*

*3) He should not have exited the service Voluntarily.*

*So the normal retirees prior to 01 09 14 do not have any impact on the para 44 v of supreme court judgement*

*Hence the para 44 v is not for NORMAL RETIREES prior to 01 09 14 retirees but it is for post 01 09 14 retirees who exited the service voluntarily prior to 01 09 14. Or EARLY RETIREES. Or EARLY PENSIONERS.*

*But the para 44 v is mis interpreted by EPFO as it is for pre 01 09 14 NORMAL retirees which is not correct.*

*The EPFO is mis interpreting the para 44 v just like he mis interpreted exempted trust members are not eligible for higher EPS pension as per circular dated 31 05 17 which was in-validated by supreme court.*

*Now EPFO again appealed in supreme court against the Punjab and Haryana High court land mark judgement dated 28 03 25.*

*ACTION NEEDED.*

*The EPS pensioners unitedly should file a case in the supreme court or to implead with respondents of EPFO’s appeal on supreme court.*

*Prayers should be*

*As per RC Gupta judgement, there was no cut off date for joint option under para 11 3 as it stood prior to 01 09 14 amendment.*

*As per RC Gupta judgement the joint option under para 11 3 is allowed even after retirement.*

*As per RC Gupta judgement the requirement is option under para 26 6 and/or contribution to PROVIDENT FUND is on actual salary but not on minimum salary.*

*Once the option under para 26 6 is given and/or Provident Fund is contributed on actual salary the joint option under para 11 3 can not be restricted.*

*Once the differential contribution with interest is refunded by the retiree the benefit has to be given to the EPS pensioner.*

*The 04/11/22 judgement is related to Amendment GSR NO 609 E which is applicable to post 01 09 14 retirees but not for pre 01 09 14 retirees.*
*How ever the 04/11/22 judgement upheld the RC Gupta judgement at para 41.*

*Para 44 V and 44 VI of 04 11 22 judgement are related to post 01 09 14 retirees as per para 12 1 b of EPS 95 scheme . They are to be retired on or after 01 09 14 but retired earlier VOLUNTARILY prior to 01 09 14 and are drawing the earlier (reduced) EPS pension.*

*Hence normal retirees prior to 01 09 14 are not effected by the 04 11 22 judgement.*

*But despite all these favourable points , THE EPFO rejected all the joint options illegally for pre 01 09 14 retirees showing the para 44 V which is not applicable to them but only applicable to post 01 09 14 retirees but Voluntarily retired prior to 01 09 14 and drawing reduced EPS pension as per para 12 1 b of the EPS pension scheme.*

*The court has allowed 2 months time in 04 11 22 judgement to implement RC Gupta judgement, but despite of laps of 2 years 10 months a single case has not been accepted by EPFO with malafide intention. Hence the court may order to implement the RC Gupta judgement immediately without imposing para 44 V for NORMAL Retirees prior to 01 09 14 which is for post 01 09 14 retirees.*

*If the higher EPS pension is not implemented with in 3 months to the NORMAL retirees prior to 01 09 14 and who has opted for higher EPS pension , the court may order for payment of penal interest at the rate of 12% for the the delayed period.*

*Hoping for the best.*

*With regards.*

*Thank you.*

*G Narayana.*

Post Views: 40

Join Our Telegram Group