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

2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 6189

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Sushil Kukreja, JJ
Ranjiv Paul – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & ors. – Respondent
CWP No. 9235/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Rajinder Thakur, Senior Panel Counsel, Mr. Raman Sethi, Advocate

A petitioner must demonstrate standing and present claims in a timely manner to maintain public interest litigation concerning personal service matters.

Headnote:(A) Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 - Sections 5, 6A, and 6D - Quashing of regulations - Substantive relief sought to quash regulations alleged to be ultra vires various provisions and the Constitution - The petitioner's claims were barred due to prior unchallenged notifications and lack of standing. (Paras 1-9)

(B) Public Interest Litigation - Maintenance of petition - The petitioner failed to demonstrate entitlement to maintain a public interest litigation in a service matter or explain the delay in filing, thus rendering the petition misconceived. (Paras 2-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner requested relief regarding pension regulations but failed to timely challenge crucial notifications from 2008 and 2014, admitting ignorance of them. Issues arose over the timeliness and standing of the petition.

Findings of Court:
The court found the petition to be misconceived; no valid explanation was given for the delay in filing the claims or for the nature of the claims presented.

Issues: Whether the petitioner was justified in delaying the challenge and maintaining such a petition in public interest regarding personal service issues.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petition was misconceived as the petitioner failed to establish standing and reasonable timeliness for the relief sought.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. court's observation on petition merit and timing issues. (Para 4)

Justich e Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (oral)

g Clearly, this petition is misconceived.

2 The petitioner had initially filed the instant petition for grant of the following substantive reliefs:

1. issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned Employees Provident Fund (officers and employees' conditions of services) regulations, 2008 and Employees Provident Fund (officers

1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

and employees' conditions of services) regulations, 2024 of being ultra-vires of proviso to regulation No.3 of Employees Provident Fund (officers and employees' conditions of services) regulations, 1962 and section 5, section 6A and section 6D of EPF & MP Act, 1952 and article 14 & 53 of the Constitution of India. H

2. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent No. 1 & 2 to restore pensio nary benefits under EPS, 1995 to its members as it stood prior to various amendments carried out since 2008 by quashing GSR No. 688(E) dated 26.09.2008 and 609(E) dated 22.08.2014 (Annexure P/24) due tot faulty actuarial reports.

3. Permanently restrain the respondent No.1&2 in altering the general conudition of service of regular employees as laid down in the Employees Provident Fund (officers and employees' conditions of services) regulations, 1962, w.r.t. the Capplicability of Employees' Provident Fund Organization (Contributory Provident Fund) Regulations, 1960 and three Schemes framed under the Employees'

Provident Funds & Misc. Provisions Act, 1952.

4. Respondent No.2 may be directed to not to enter the domain of respondent No.1 as envisaged in the PF Act in i the interest of justice and fair-play.

5. Respondent No.1 &2 may be directed to restore parity amongst EPS, 1995 members and staff of EPFO with regards to payment of pension and medical allowance strictly as per Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 framed under the Employees' Provident Funds & Misc. Provisions Act, 1952 in the interest of justice and fair-play.

6. Respondent No.1 may be directed to initiate action for black listing the respondent No.4, for professional misconduct in the interest of justice and fair-play.

7. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent No.3 to ascertain the exact amount overdrawn from the administrative fund for payment oHf pension to EPFO staff as per CCS (Pension) rules, 1972 and initiate steps to redeposit the amount ext ra drawn into the administrative fund for better administration of the EPF Schemes.

3 When the petitioner wtas asked to explain as to how he was entitled to file and maintain this petition, which was in the nature of public interest litigation, that too, in a service matter and confronted with the judgment rendered by this Court on an identical issue in Samriti Gupta vs. State of H.P. 2016(1) ILR 403, he thereafter filed an application (CMP No. 12176/2025) for amendment of the writ petition with following prayers:-

1) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned Employees Provident Fund (officers and employees’ conditions of services regulations, 2008 and Employees Provident Fund (officers and employees' conditions of services) regulations, 2024 of being ultra-vires of "first and second proviso to Regulation 1(2)(ii) as well as to regulation No.3" of Employees Provident Fund (officers and employees' conditions of services) regulations, 1962 and section 5, section 6A and section 6D of EPF & MP Act, 1952 and article 14 & 53 of the Constitution of India.

2. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent No.1 & 2 to revise pensionary benefits under EPS, 1995 to petitioner being one of its member from February, 2018 i.e. from date of retirement,H by quashing GSR No. 688(E) dated 22.09.2008 and 609(E) dated 22.08.2014 (Annexure P/24) due to faulty actuarial reports.

3.Respondent No.1 &2 may be directed to resto

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 Back to top