IN a major ruling, the Supreme Courtroom Friday upheld the Workers’ Pension (Modification) Scheme, 2014, but additionally learn down sure provisions in regards to the present subscribers to the scheme.
A 3-judge bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia stated the amendments to the scheme shall apply to workers of exempted institutions as they do for the staff of normal institutions. There are about 1,300 corporations within the checklist of the EPFO’s (Workers’ Provident Fund Organisation) exempted institutions.
In a nutshell, Friday’s Supreme Courtroom ruling offers EPFO members, who’ve availed of the EPS, one other alternative over the subsequent 4 months to decide and contribute as much as 8.33 per cent of their precise salaries — as in opposition to 8.33 per cent of the pensionable wage capped at Rs 15,000 a month – in the direction of pension.
The EPS modification of August 22, 2014, had raised the pensionable wage cap to Rs 15,000 a month from Rs 6,500 a month, and allowed solely current members (as on September 1, 2014) together with their employers train the choice to contribute 8.33 per cent on their precise salaries (if it exceeded the cap) in the direction of the pension fund. This was extendable by one other six months on the discretion of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. It, nevertheless, excluded new members who earned above ?15,000 and joined after September 2014 from the scheme fully.
The modification additionally required such members (with precise salaries over Rs 15,000 a month) to contribute an extra 1.16 per cent of their wage exceeding Rs 15,000 a month in the direction of the pension fund.
These current members who didn’t train the choice inside the stipulated interval or prolonged interval, have been deemed to haven’t opted for contribution over the pensionable wage cap and the additional contributions already made to the pension fund have been to be diverted to the Provident Fund account of the member, together with curiosity.
Sources stated solely a negligible share of EPFO members – with salaries greater than the Rs 15,000 a month pensionable wage cap – had opted for contributions based mostly on their precise salaries.
Selection of upper pension
Commerce unions have been resisting the federal government argument that staff in any respect ranges ought to have extra liquidity. The SC, by its ruling, has let the employees resolve whether or not they need to go for greater provident fund or select greater pension payouts.
The Supreme Courtroom resolution got here on appeals filed by the EPFO in opposition to the judgements of the Kerala, Rajasthan and Delhi Excessive Courts, which had quashed the Workers’ Pension (Modification) Scheme, 2014.
Exercising unique powers below Article 142, the Supreme Courtroom prolonged the time to go for the brand new scheme, by 4 months. “There was uncertainty relating to the validity of the put up modification scheme, which was quashed by the Excessive Courts. Thus, all workers who didn’t train the choice however are entitled to take action, however couldn’t attributable to interpretation of the closing date, should be given sure changes,” it stated
Beneath the pre-amendment scheme, the pensionable wage was computed as the typical of the wage drawn through the 12 months previous to exit from membership of the Pension Fund. The amendments raised this to a mean of 60 months previous to exit from the membership of the Pension Fund.
The Supreme Courtroom agreed with the modifications and stated “we don’t discover any flaw in altering the premise of computation of pensionable wage”. Nonetheless, the court docket held the modification requiring members to contribute an extra 1.16 per cent of their wage exceeding Rs 15,000 a month as extremely vires the provisions of the Workers’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.
“For the reason that (1952) Act doesn’t ponder any contribution to be made by an worker to stay within the scheme, the Central Authorities below the scheme itself can’t mandate such a stipulation,” the Supreme Courtroom stated, and even when the federal government needed to, it may solely have finished this by the use of a legislative modification, it stated.
“On the similar time, we can’t ignore the truth that the pension quantity to be paid has been calculated on projections that the corpus would come with the choice of workers’ extra contribution of 1.16 per cent. We additionally can’t mandate the Central Authorities to contribute to a pension scheme, in absence of a legislative provision to that impact. It will be for the directors to readjust the contribution sample inside the scope of the statute and one doable answer may very well be to boost the extent of the employer’s contribution within the scheme,” the Supreme Courtroom stated.
The bench stated it’s suspending the operation of this a part of the judgment for six months “in order that the legislature could take into account the need of bringing applicable legislative modification on this rely”.
Specialists stated the federal government shouldn’t tweak the present distribution between provident fund and pension. “The (pension) realisation was greater within the earlier regime. The argument of the federal government was that staff in any respect ranges ought to have extra liquidity, which is what the commerce unions are resisting. The employees ought to get to resolve relatively than the federal government taking the decision. The federal government ought to present extra choices to the employee – whether or not she ought to go for greater provident fund or outdated system of upper annuities – and it shouldn’t tamper with the present distribution between PF and pension,” Okay R Shyam Sundar, labour economist and professor at XLRI, Xavier Faculty of Administration Jamshedpur, stated.