Type of

Description Analysis and Action to be taken

Case

Type 1 Application for validation of The question of eligibility for higher

Joint Option received online pension in respect of those
from pensioners (Pre pensioners/members who were/are
01.09.2014 cases) and Joint employed in establishments where
Options received online the Provident Fund contribution
from employees and was/is only on the statutory ceiling
pensioners (Post does not arise at all. Such cases are
01.09.2014 cases) who to be rejected. However, as per the
were/are employed in extant HO instructions, intimation
establishments where the must be given to the
Provident Fund contribution applicants/optees in question giving
was always on the statutory them one month’s time to represent
ceiling and not on actual or submit additional proof/
(higher) salary. documents, if any, before rejection.

Type 2 Application for validation of As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s

Joint Option received online judgment in the R.C. Gupta case, a
from Pre 01.09.2014 member could exercise option under
pensioners where Provident the erstwhile Para 11(3) of the EPS
Fund contribution was made 1995 anytime during his/her
throughout on actual employment. There is no separate
(higher) salary over and approval required under Para 11(3)
above the statutory ceiling and contribution to the Pension Fund
but contribution to the on higher salary is at the option of
Pension Fund was the employee and employer. To prove
throughout restricted to the that the employee and employer had
salary ceiling. indeed opted for the same,
contribution to the Pension Fund on
higher salary must necessarily have
been received before cessation of
employment. If this is not so, then
the applicant must show that he/she
was prevented from exercising option
due to a specific order or
communication from EPFO. All such
cases are therefore to be treated as
category 4(iii) cases as described in
the HO Circular No. Pension/
SupremeCourt/ judgment/
HPM/2022/405 dated 23.04.2023 and
requisite clarification called for before
taking final decision as per the
instructions contained in paragraph 7
of the said circular.
Type 3 Application for validation of As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s
Joint Option received online judgment in the RC Gupta case,
from Pre 01.09.2014 “Exercise of the option under
pensioners where Provident paragraph 26(6) is a necessary
Fund contribution was made precursor to the exercise of option
throughout on actual under Clause 11(3).” That being so
(higher) salary over and and in light of the extant instructions
above the statutory ceiling contained in the HO Circular No.
and contribution to the Pension/ SupremeCourt/ judgment/
Pension Fund on higher HPM/2022/405 dated 23.04.2023 it
salary was also received is necessary to confirm if there is
during employment. approval of the joint request to
contribute to the Provident Fund on
actual (higher) salary with the
employer’s undertaking to pay
administrative charges on such higher
salary, as per the provisions of Para
26(6) of the EPF Scheme 1952.
Accordingly, in such cases, if the
requisite approval granted under Para
26(6) by an officer of the rank of
APFC or above is not available in the
office records, clarification regarding
the same is to be called for from the
applicant before taking final decision.
Thus, all such cases are to be treated
as category 4(iii) cases as
described in the HO Circular dated
23.04.2023 and requisite clarification
called for before taking final decision
as per the instructions contained in
paragraph 7 of the said circular.

Type 4 Application for validation of Such cases are prima facie not
Joint Option received online eligible and are to be rejected. They
from Pre 01.09.2014 are covered under category 4(ii) of
pensioners where the form the HO Circular dated 23.04.2023. As
is not approved or is per the instructions in paragraph 6 of
rejected by the employer. the said circular, before rejection an
opportunity is to be given to the
employer for correcting any mistakes,
under intimation to the pensioners.
The time allowed to the employer will
be one month.

Type 5 Application for validation of

Joint Option received online
from Pre 01.09.2014
pensioners where the
 Provident Fund contribution
was made throughout on Such cases are prima facie eligible
actual (higher) salary over and fall under the category 4(i) as
and above the statutory specified in the HO Circular No.
ceiling and contribution to Pension/ SupremeCourt/ judgment/
the Pension Fund on higher HPM/2022/ 405 dated 23.04.2023
salary was also received and Office to proceed for scrutiny of
during employment and such cases in line with paragraph 5 of
where the approval granted the said circular.
by an officer not below the
rank of APFC under Para
26(6) of the EPF Scheme is
also available.

Type 6 Joint Option received online As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s
from Post 01.09.2014 judgment in the RC Gupta case,
employees and pensioners “Exercise of the option under
where the Provident Fund paragraph 26(6) is a necessary
contribution was made precursor to the exercise of option
throughout on actual under Clause 11(3).” That being so,
(higher) salary over and before accepting the Joint Option now
above the statutory ceiling. submitted under Para 11(3) and in
light of the extant instructions
contained in the HO Circular No.
Pension/ SupremeCourt/ judgment/
HPM/2022/405 dated 23.04.2023, it
is necessary to confirm if there is
approval of the joint request to
contribute to the Provident Fund on
actual (higher) salary with the
employer’s undertaking to pay
administrative charges on such higher
salary, as per the provisions of Para
26(6) of the EPF Scheme 1952.
Accordingly, in such cases, if the
requisite approval granted under Para
26(6) by an officer of the rank of
APFC or above is not available in the
office records, clarification regarding
the same is to be called for from the
optee before taking final decision.
Thus, all such cases are to be treated
as category 4(iii) cases as
described in the HO Circular dated
23.04.2023 and requisite clarification
called for before taking final decision
as per the instructions contained in
paragraph 7 of the said circular.
Type 7 Joint Option received online Such Joint Options are prima facie
from Post 01.09.2014 invalid and are to be rejected. They
employees and pensioners are covered under category 4(ii) of
where the form is not the HO Circular dated 23.04.2023. As
approved or is rejected by per the instructions in paragraph 6 of
the employer. the said circular, before rejection an
opportunity is to be given to the
employer for correcting any mistakes,
under intimation to the employees/
pensioners. The time allowed to the
employer will be one month.

Type 8 Joint Option received online Such Joint Options are prima facie
from Post 01.09.2014 valid and fall under the category
employees and pensioners 4(i) as specified in the HO Circular
where the Provident Fund No. Pension/ SupremeCourt/
contribution was made judgment/ HPM/2022/ 405 dated
throughout on actual 23.04.2023 and Office to proceed for
(higher) salary over and scrutiny of such cases in line with
above the statutory ceiling paragraph 5 of the said circular.
and where the approval
granted by an officer not
below the rank of APFC
under Para 26(6) of the EPF
Scheme is also available.

Note:-

1) In order to decide on the eligibility of an applicant/ optee who was/is

employed in an establishment exempted from the EPF Scheme, it has to be
confirmed as to whether the approved Rules of the exempted Trust specifically
provide for contribution to the Provident Fund on actual (higher) salary over and
above the statutory ceiling by both the employee and employer and such
contribution was paid uninterruptedly throughout the employment.

2) Newspaper establishments and newspaper employees are governed by the

special provisions contained in Para 80 of the EPF Scheme whereby Para 26 of
the Scheme stands modified in its application to such establishments and
employees. Accordingly, final decision in respect of any cases pertaining to
newspaper establishments and employees shall be with reference to the
aforesaid special provisions.