SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

V.K.JAIN, ANUP K.THAKUR
ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER – Appellant
Versus
SHANMUGHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Puneet Garg, Advocate, for the Petitioner; None, for the Respondent

ORDER

Justice V.K. Jain Presiding Member (Oral)—The respondent/complainant who was working as a cashew worker on the daily wag basis from 1993 and was contributing to the Employees Provident Fund Scheme since 1986, superannuated on 31.12.2009 attaining the age of 58 years. He was granted a monthly pension of Rs. 117/- w.e.f. 11.5.2009. Being aggrieved, he approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint claiming that he was entitled to a monthly pension of Rs. 955/- along with other benefits.

2. The complaint was resisted by the petitioner. It was stated in the reply filed by the petitioner before the District Forum that the complainant joined the EPF Scheme only on 11.5.1997. It was further stated that though he rendered service in the Scheme from 11.5.1997 to 11.5.2009, i.e., for 11 years, 11 months and 29 days, his pensionable service was only 3 years, 5 months and 23 days. The aforesaid pensionable service was worked out by deducting the non-contributory period of 3106 days.

3. The District Forum vide its order dated 28.11.2013 directed the petitioner to recalculate the pension of the complainant taking his pensionable service to be 12 years. Compensation qua

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top