The common question for consideration in all these Original Petitions was whether the employer was entitled to discontinue from the remittance of the provident fund contributions in excess of the rate prescribed by law, when the employer was contributing in excess of the statutory limits on the basis of the joint application filed by the employer and employees before the Provident Fund Authorities.

2. OP. Nos. 13968/01 and 14011/01 were filed by the North Malabar Gramin Bank Officers Association and the North Malabar Gramin Bank Employees’ Association for quashing Ext.P2 Circular issued by the North Malabar Gramin Bank directing the discontinuance of the payment of contributions in excess of the prescribed rate by the employer. OP Nos. 17647/01, 17855/01 and 17994/01 were filed by the South Malabar Gramin Bank Staff Association and the South Malabar Gramin Bank Officers Congress and also the Staff Union and others for quashing Ext.P2 Circular for discontinuing the contributions made by the management in excess of the statutory limits. The main relief prayed for in all these original Petitions was to direct the Management Bank to pay contribution at 12 per cent of the entire salary without taking into consideration of the salary ceiling and for directing the respondent management not to withdraw the consent given under paragraph 26(6) of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme. 1952 (for short, the Scheme).

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Management.

4. The Officers and employees of the South Malabar Gramin Bank and the North Malabar Gramin Bank were contributing to the Scheme in excess of the rate of contributions prescribed by law. The employer also was making equal contributions under the Scheme which was in excess of the statutory limits. On the basis of joint applications filed by the management and the employees before the concerned EPF authorities. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the Unions that by Ext.P2 notification, the management had withdrawn from the above agreement without notice to the employees and officers and had reduced and limited their share of contribution to the statutory limits and as the management had already consented for making contribution in excess of the statutory limits, they were not entitled to withdraw from the above agreement unilaterally and they were bound to continue to contribute the same amount. The learned counsel for the management submitted that due to the change of circumstances including the enhancement of salary of the employees and other benefits, and also as per the objection raised by the inspecting authorities. It had become impossible for the Bank to make such contributions in excess of the statutory limits and hence the management had issued the Circular informing all the employees that the above consent granted earlier shall stand withdrawn. It was further submitted that there was no statutory bar for the management to withdraw from the payment of the contribution in excess of the statutory limits and their liability was only to make the contribution upto the statutory limits. Paragraph 29 of the Scheme deals with the payment of the contributions to the Scheme. Sub-paragraphs 1 & 2 of paragraph 29 read as follows:

29. Contribution-(1) The contributions payable by the employer under the Scheme shall be at the rate of ten per cent of the basic wages, dearness allowance (including the cash value of any food concession) and retaining allowance (if any) payable to each employees to whom the Scheme applies.

Provided that the above rate of contribution shall be twelve per cent in respect of any establishment or class of establishments which the Central Government may specify in the Official Gazette from time to time under the first proviso to sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 6 of the Act.

(2) The Contribution payable by the employee under the Scheme shall be equal to the contribution payable by the employer in respect of such empl