Sri N. Rama Subbaiah, D.No: 5/194, Vizianagaram Street, Proddutoor, Cuddapah District, Andhra Pradesh:
The above Employees on attaining the age of 58 years as on 30-07-2007, was sanctioned Pension under Ceiling @ 1,147/- vide PPO No: GRCDP00065982
Later it was revised to 4,013/- vide PPO No: GRCDP00065XXX as per the Judgement of 4th October, 2016 (Sri R.C. Gupta & Others) by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Again it was restored to 1,147/- vide PPO No: GRCDP000XXXX9.
1) Employee not submitted Option under Para No: 26(6) under Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 when his Wages crossed the Ceiling.
2) Employee has to contribute above Ceiling to EPS,’95 only during the period of actual service.
3) As per the judgement of 4th November,2022 by Hon’ble Supreme Court, those who retired on or before 31-08-2014 are not eligible for Higher Pension.
1) How EPFO accepted Contributions above Ceiling under EPFS,’52 without verifying whether the Employee submitted Option under Para No: 26(6) of EPFS,’52 during the Employee’s service?
2) How EPFO accepted the Administrative Charges @ 0.65% on Wages above Ceiling in favour of the above Employee who is from Unexempted Establishment?
3) Employee claimed Higher Pension as per the Judgement of Sri R. C. Gupta & Others, vide Judgement of 4th October, 2016 which permits restrospective Contributions even after retirement.
4) The Judgement of 4th November, 2022 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to decide the validity of the Amendments carried out to the EPS,’95 w. e. f. 01-09-2014 with which the above Employee is in no way connected as he got retired on 30-04-2007.
5) No Circular was issued by EPFO Head Quarters on the Judgement of 4th November, 2022 till date. Then how P. F. Commissioner, Cuddapah, himself interpret the judgement in case of the above Employee.
6) P. F. Commissioner, Cuddapah is saying that he verified the Option under Para 26(6) of EPFS, 1952 as per the Circular of EPFO issued on 04-06-2019, then why he is not following the same pattern when it comes to the Judgement of 4th November, 2022 i. e., to wait for the Circular from EPFO Head Quarters?
7) The Judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of A. P. itself should tell that the judgement is subject to any outcome of the Judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court still to be delivered as on the date of Judgement (of Hon’ble High Court of A. P.). But P. F. Commissioner, Cuddapah himself attributing the judgement of Hon’ble High Court of A. P. to Supreme Court Judgement of 4th November, 2022.
As per the RTI information submitted to Sri Neeraja Bhargava, by EPFO, the Pension of 24,672 Employees was revised. Out of which 102 by P. F. Commissioner, Cuddapah. But on verification of the list submitted to Hon’ble Supreme Court which contain PPO Nos, only 14 PPOs are appearing issued to P. F. Commisioner, Cuddapah. I. e., 13.73%