EPFO fined ₹1.5 lakh for not revising pension amount

The commission further directed the organisation not to demand and charge any kind of interest on the amount to be adjusted while revising the pension of the complainants

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EFFO), Chandigarh, to pay compensation of ₹50,000 each to three subscribers for not revising their pension without any valid reasons.

As per the order, EPFO has been directed to pay for causing mental agony, harassment and unfair trade practice. In addition, organisation was to pay ₹35,000 as cost of litigation. (iStock)

Krishan Murari and two other employees of Punjab State Federation of Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited, Sector 17-B, in a complaint filed before the commission said they were covered under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

The Act originally did not provide for any pension scheme and Section 6A was introduced to the Act by way of an amendment made in 1995, which provides pension for employees. It provides that the pension fund was to comprise a deposit of 8.33% of the employer’s contribution towards the provident fund (PF) corpus, as per the prevailing statute.

It was also stated that the pensionable salary was increased to ₹15,000 by a notification dated August 22, 2014, which was to be effective from September 1, 2014, but when they approached the commissioner, demanding revised pension, the same was refused on the ground that there was a cut-off date to exercise the option for taking benefit under the revised pension scheme.

The commission comprising justice Raj Shekhar Attri, president, and Rajesh K Arya, member, also directed EPFO to revise and release the amount of pension after adjusting the amount of PF already paid to the complainants in the amount of pension payable to complainants, within a period of 45 days.

As per the order, EPFO has been directed to pay for causing mental agony, harassment and unfair trade practice. In addition, organisation was to pay ₹35,000 as cost of litigation.

The commission further directed the organisation not to demand and charge any kind of interest on the amount to be adjusted while revising the pension of the complainants.