Centre, employees for detailed study of EPFO case verdict given by Supreme Court
Contents News/Article Date: 4th November 2022
Relating to which Act The Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952
Applicable to which State: All the establishments in the States with PF coverage
Type: Supreme Court Hearing – final pronouncement of the Judgement on 4th November 2022
Pertains to employers and employees
Relevance of this news: Karma Management Global Consulting Solutions Pvt. Ltd is in the business of Payroll, Outsourcing, and Regulatory Compliances since its inception in 2004 since then, has brought in a lot of efficiencies and technological upgradations with experts on its role, to ease the hassles of Payroll Processing, Temp Staffing On-boarding, Regulatory and Payroll compliances by providing customized solutions to all its elite clients.
EPF Pension is a part of PF compliance, in this case, the high courts had allowed a pension in proportion to the salary above the ceiling limit of Rs. 15,000/- but later on, the EPFO and Union government sought to review, and the matter was re-opened for hearing on merits and the verdict was pronounced on 4th November 2022 as per summary given below.
In a crucial judgment, the Supreme Court held the provisions of the Employees’ Pension (Amendment) Scheme 2014 to be legal and valid. However, so far as the present members of the fund are concerned, the Court has read down certain provisions of the scheme.
While allowing the appeals filed by the Employees Provident Fund Organization and the Union Government challenging the Kerala, Rajasthan, and Delhi High Court judgments which had quashed the Employee’s Pension (Amendment) Scheme, 2014, the Court read down certain provisions of the scheme.
In a relief to several employees, the Court held that employees who have not exercised the option to join the Employees’ Pension Scheme must be given a further chance of 6 months to do so.
Subject: EPF Pension Case: Supreme Court Verdict On EPFO Appeals Likely to Be Pronounced Next Week
For greater details, appended below is the complete news item
Centre, employees for detailed study of EPFO case verdict
New Delhi November 04, 2022, 21:41 | Updated: November 05, 2022, 01:55 IST
Gupta Vs EPFO. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu
Labour Ministry to come up with detailed guidelines on implementing the Supreme Court judgment
The Union Labour Ministry, the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO), and organizations of employees and employers are studying the Supreme Court Order on Friday upholding the validity of the Employees’ Pension (Amendment) Scheme of 2014. Sources in the Labour Ministry said it would come up with detailed guidelines for the employees and employers on implementing the verdict.
Workers’ representative on the EPFO Board of Trustees A.K. Padmanabhan told The Hindu that the Supreme Court had upheld the verdict in the case of RC Gupta vs EPFO. “Maybe there are some points that need to be clarified. We have been maintaining that what EPFO has done to a section of workers was an injustice. We will study the judgment before making a detailed comment. Many of our unions have gone to the court demanding clarification on this issue,” Mr. Padmanabhan said.
‘Incomplete verdict’
BMS national secretary V. Radhakrishnan said the apex court had not taken a decision on a number of issues that were connected with the minimum pension. “This verdict is incomplete. Certain aspects of the verdict such as approving the EPFO’s argument that the average of the last 60 months’ salary should be considered for calculating the pension are not good for the workers. But the verdict clearly declined to accept the EPFO’s argument that the worker will have to remit the Union Government’s component of 1.16%. This is a welcome step. Our view is that this verdict needs more clarity from the court,” he said.
K.E. Raghunathan, another member of the board representing employers, said the judgment needed to be studied in detail on its deliverables from each stakeholder such as the EPFO, employers, and employees for a detailed remark. “However, from an employer perspective, on a closer look at the judgment, it infers there may not be any immediate impact. As per page 39 of the judgment, the Supreme Court suggests that an employer’s contribution to pension can be increased as a possible solution. This could be a cause of concern that employers’ burden may increase,” he said. Mr. Raghunathan added that such a step, anyway, would require an amendment to the Act, if the Centre so decides. “Even then there will be no additional liability on the employer. Only inter-se allocation of contribution between PF and pension will change,” he added.