Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. SAIL CMO PF Trust rules were duly approved by EPFO.

7. In respect of un-exempted establishments, the EPFO manages all aspects of both Provident Fund and Pension Fund. Based on the said Act and its amendments approved by parliament, "Model PF Trust Rules" have been prescribed by the EPFO authorities as a template for adoption by the exempted establishment. Every exempted establishment customizes the „Model Trust Rules‟ as per their specific circumstances. The PF Trust rules applicable to SAIL-CMO were accordingly adopted from the „MODEL TRUST RULES of EPFO by its PF Trust, namely, Hindustan Steel Limited, Central Purchase Organization, Sales & Transport Calcutta Provident Fund Trust and duly submitted to EPFO for its approval, along with revisions in the said rules, if any, from time to time. In full compliance with the statutory provisions, the internal trust rules of SAIL-CMO also incorporated the same ceiling wages as mandated by the EPS.

8. All employees of both exempted and unexempted establishments are considered to be the same as far as pension under EPS, 1995 is concerned and EPFO directly deals with pension matters for both classes of establishments. For the purpose of contribution to Pension fund, employers only forward the requisite contribution every month to EPFO and they have no further role as employer under the EPS, 1995.

9. Mr. Majumder argues that after pronouncement of the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the matter of higher pension based on actual 2025:CHC-AS:2078 wages instead of ceiling wages (EPFO & Anr. Vs. Sunil Kumar B. & Ors., (2023) 12 SCC 701), joint options as submitted by the eligible member were duly vetted and uploaded by the employer on the EPFO site along with wage details through online system, for approval by EPFO.

11. In accordance with this, SAIL-CMO PF Trust submitted the modified rules for approval by EPFO on 04.10.2024.

12. After sitting on the issue for more than three months, they declined to approve the revision and stated in their letter dated 21.01.2025 that any modification in trust rule after date of Supreme Court judgment dated 04.11.2022 cannot be allowed.

13. From mid January 2025, the EPFO circulars took on a hostile tenor when they started quoting Trust rules for rejecting joint options for pension on actual wages and stating that this was in keeping with the Hon‟ble Supreme Court judgment of 04.11.2022, EPFO & Anr. Vs. Sunil Kumar B. & Ors., (2023) 12 SCC 701, while the fact is that there is not a single word in the said judgment about internal trust rules of the establishment.

46. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of rejection, the concerned employer by a letter dated 28.02.2025 clarified as to how the said orders were bad in law and requested the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Gr.II), EPFO, Regional Office and the EPFO to reconsider its decision.

47. However, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Gr.II), EPFO, Regional Office by an order dated 12.03.2025, on similar grounds as the 2025:CHC-AS:2078 previous rejection orders, rejected the concerned employer‟s prayer for reconsideration and thus held the ex-employees of the concerned establishment ineligible for pension on higher wages.