The petitioner is an Association of Provident Fund Pensioners, who seek similar benefits as granted in Exhibit P9. The issue dealt with in Exhibit P9 was with respect to revision of salary beyond the limit of Rs.6,500/- as provided in the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995. Exhibit P9 judgment found that if retrospective revision of pay is granted, then necessarily revision of pension has also to follow.
2. The petitioner claims to be a registered association of retired employees of State and Central Public Sector Undertakings. However, the petitioner, in the writ petition urges the benefit only to the employees of the 3rd respondent, none of whom are ascertainable from the pleadings in the writ petition. It is also submitted by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Provident Fund Organization that many of the employees who have submitted option along with the employer do not have salary beyond the limit of Rs.6,500/- and in such circumstances, many of them WP(C).No.20039 of 2014 - 2 -
would not be entitled to any revision also. In any event, the petitioner-Association cannot be heard to make the above submissions merely on the basis of lists, produced at Exhibits P2 and P3, without indicating the entitlement of each of such individual employees.
In the above circumstance, the petitioner is found to have no locus standi to urge the cause of the individual employees. However, reserving liberty to the individual employees to seek for similar reliefs, if they are so entitled, the writ petition would stand dismissed. No costs.
vku.
Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran, Judge ( true copy )