EPF Pension | Kerala High Court Directs EPFO To Allow Opting Of Higher Pension Without Insisting On Submission Of Option Form Under Para 26(6) Of The Scheme

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday(April 12) directed the Employees Provident Fund Organization to modify its online system to allow employees/pensioners to comply with the directives of the Supreme Court for opting for higher pension without having to provide copies of the option under paragraph 26(6) of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.

A single bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman while granting the interim order observed:

“the Employees Provident Fund Organization and the authorities under the same are directed to make adequate provisions in their online facility to enable the employees/pensioners to furnish the options in tune with the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court, without the production of the copies of option under paragraph 26(6) of the Scheme, 1952 and the details thereof, for the time being”

The court passed the interim order while considering the plea of 20 BSNL employees pertaining to their entitlement for higher pension under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

The petitioners informed the court that under the directions of the Supreme Court in EPF Organisation v. Sunil Kumar 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 912, they were to submit their options for higher pension under the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 by 03.05.2023.

The Petitioners also informed the court that one of the details to be furnished in the option form was a copy of the permission under para 26(6) of the 1952 Scheme. The petitioners were not able to submit their online option form, as the system insisted on the details of the option under para 26 (6) for successful submission of the form. The petitioners would not be able to avail the benefit of the scheme if they do not submit the form within the cut-off date, it was argued.

The petitioners’ case was that even though they were allowed to pay higher contribution based on their salary, above the ceiling limit prescribed, as provided under para 26(6) of the Scheme, no formal option had been submitted by them as the EPFO had never insisted on submission of such option.

However the EPFO argued that the option under 26(6) was an important requirement for availing the benefit of the scheme and the option submitted by the petitioners could not be processed without the same.

The court however, found the balance of convenience to be in favour of the petitioners and granted the interim order as prayed for.

“the only view that can possibly be taken is that the petitioners have succeeded in establishing a prima facie case, warranting an interim order in the matter. It is to be noted that the balance of convenience also favours the petitioners. Evidently, the Honourable Supreme Court fixed the cut-off date as 3.05.2023 for submitting the options. Now on account of the insistence from the EPFO to furnish the details of the option under para 26(6)of the Scheme, 1952, and also in view of the peculiar nature of the online facility provided for such submissions, they are now prevented from submitting the said options. There cannot be any dispute that if they were not permitted to submit their options before the cut-off date, they would be deprived of their opportunity to claim the benefits of the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court forever. Therefore, the petitioners deserve an interim order for that reason,i.e. the balance of convenience, as well.”

Case Title: Saheer S V Union Of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

Click here to read/download order