IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL nd ON THE 2 OF MAY, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 9004 of 2019 BETWEEN:-

VINAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA S/O LATE SHRI R.S.

SHRIVASTAVA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SR NO 4436 RETD EMPLOYEE HA R/O 1817 IPPOSITE PREM NAGAR POST OFFICE PREM NAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI AKASH CHOUDHURY - ADVOCATE)

AND

1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT OF EMPLYMENT (DELHI)

2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION THR. ITS CHIEF PROVINDENT COMMISSIONER BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAWAN, 14, BHIKAJI, CAMA PALACE (DELHI)

3. THE COMMISSIONER REGIONAL PROVIENT FU N D VIJAY NAGAR, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. HINDUSTAN ANTIBIOTICS LTD THR. ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR REGISTERED OFFICE AND FACTORY PIMPRI (MAHARASHTRA)

5. THE SECRETARY HINDUSTAN ANTIBIOTICS PF TRUST REGISTERED OFFICE AND FACTORY PIMPRI (MAHARASHTRA)

.....RESPONDENTS Signature Not Verified SAN (BY SHRI J.K. PILLAI - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3)

Date: 2023.05.03 18:25:46 IST This petition coming on for admission. this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is heard finally.

In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has not challenged any specific order but are aggrieved by non-grant of higher pension on the basis of contribution made towards actual salary under the Employees Pension Scheme,1995.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue involved in this petition is already settled by the decision of the Apex Court in Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Another Sunil Kumar B & Others passed in S.L.P.(C).Nos.8658-8659/2019 by which the Apex Court had disposed of the S.L.Ps. by upholding the 2014 amendment carried out in the Pension Rules of 1995 and certain directions have been issued in Paragraph No.44 of the judgment with regard to entitlement of higher pension. The directions as contained in the order of the Apex Court are reproduced below:-

"(i) The provisions contained in the notification no. G.S.R.

609(E) dated 22nd August 2014 are legal and valid. So far as present members of the fund are concerned, we have read down certain provisions of the scheme as applicable in their cases and we shall give our findings and directions on these provisions in the subsequent subparagraphs.

(ii) Amendment to the pension scheme brought about by the notification no. G.S.R. 609(E) dated 22nd August 2014 shall apply Signature Not Verified SAN to the employees of the exempted establishments in the same manner as the employees of the regular establishments. Transfer of funds from the exempted establishments shall be in the manner as we have already directed.

(iii) The employees who had exercised option under the proviso to paragraph 11(3) of the 1995 scheme and continued to be in service as on 1st September 2014, will be guided by the amended provisions of paragraph 11(4) of the pension scheme.

(iv) The members of the scheme, who did not exercise option, as contemplated in the proviso to paragraph 11(3) of the pension scheme (as it was before the 2014 Amendment) would be entitled to exercise option under paragraph 11(4) of the post amendment scheme. Their right to exercise option before 1st September 2014 stands crystallized in the judgment of this Court in the case of R.C. Gupta (supra). The scheme as it stood before 1st September 2014 did not provide for any cut off date and thus those members shall be entitled to exercise option in terms of paragraph11(4) of the scheme, as it stands at present. Their exercise of option shall be in the nature of joint options covering pre-amended paragraph 11(3) as also the amended paragraph 11(4) of the pension scheme. There was uncertainty as regards validity of the post amendment scheme, which was quashed by the aforesaid judgments of the three High Courts. Thus, all the employees who did not exercise opti