EPFO disposed of over 98.5% applications for pension on higher wages: government
According to a written reply in the Lok Sabha by Minister of State for Labour & Employment Shobha Karandlaje, 4,00,573 demand letters were issued to applicants eligible for PoHW and 11,01,582 were rejected, while 21,995 are pending.
'EPFO has processed and disposed of applications for pension on higher wages as per the directions of the Supreme Court in its judgement dated November 4, 2022. As on July 16, 2025, more than 98.5 per cent applications have been disposed of by EPFO,' the Minister said in her written reply on Monday.
The cases of PoHW are being processed on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court on November 4, 2022. Earlier in November 2022, the court had upheld the Employees' Pension (Amendment) Scheme 2014.
The Employees' Pension Scheme amendment of August 22, 2014, had raised the pensionable salary cap to ₹15,000 a month from ₹6,500 a month, and allowed members, along with their employers, to contribute 8.33% on their actual salaries (if it exceeded the cap) towards the EPS.
It had given all EPS members, as on September 1, 2014, six months to opt for the amended scheme.
Later, the EPFO had also extended the deadline for members as well as employers to submit documents many times.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
6 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Confused about Aadhaar for rent agreements? Here's what the law says
Many tenants and landlords are puzzled over the requirement of Aadhaar in rent agreements. While some say they were asked for it during registration, others insist they completed the process using other ID proofs. This confusion reflects the gap between legal provisions and on-ground practices in different states. Experts point out that Aadhaar is not legally mandatory for rent agreements. Instead, landlords and sub-registrars often accept alternative documents such as passports, voter ID or PAN cards. Concerns about data privacy and fraud have also made some wary of relying on Aadhaar alone. Here's what legal professionals say about why Aadhaar isn't always used and which identity proofs are safer to avoid complications. No law makes Aadhaar compulsory 'There is no law that makes Aadhaar mandatory for rent agreements. The Supreme Court has ruled that it is not a mandatory form of identification and has limited its mandatory use to certain government schemes only,' explained Apeksha Lodha, partner, Singhania & Co. Keyur Gandhi, managing partner at Gandhi Law Associates, added, 'Neither the Registration Act, 1908, nor any specific state rules mandate Aadhaar as a compulsory identity proof for property transactions. The UIDAI itself has consistently maintained that Aadhaar is voluntary.' Fraud fears and why Aadhaar is avoided Fake Aadhaar cards and privacy concerns have led landlords and registrars to prefer other IDs. 'Fake Aadhaar cards have been used for renting or selling property, so landlords often prefer documents like passports or PAN, which seem more traditional for identity verification,' Lodha said. Ashutosh Srivastava, partner at SKV Law Offices, cited a Karnataka High Court case where a forged Aadhaar card was used to transfer land. 'Refusals usually trace back to verification anxiety, not an official bar on the document,' he explained. Privacy risks and public data exposure Aadhaar's sensitive biometric data has raised fears of misuse. 'If this data is leaked, it can be used to open bank accounts, obtain SIM cards and claim government benefits,' Lodha noted. Ritha Ulbyre, partner at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, noted that in registered agreements, Aadhaar details may become part of public records. 'Several instances of financial fraud have been reported in different states after registering documents using Aadhaar-based authentication,' she said. Which documents are safer? To avoid complications, experts recommend using other government IDs. 'PAN card, voter ID, passport, or driving licence are widely accepted and don't pose the same privacy or compliance risks as Aadhaar,' Gandhi suggested. Srivastava advised, 'Provide a combination of IDs for added security, and if Aadhaar is used, mask sensitive details to minimise misuse.'
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
SpiceJet shares jump 6% after Supreme Court rejects Rs 1,300 crore damages appeal by Kalanithi Maran, KAL Airways
Synopsis SpiceJet shares jumped 6% after the Supreme Court dismissed a Rs 1,323 crore damages appeal by KAL Airways and Kalanithi Maran. Courts criticized their delay and concealment in the share transfer dispute. Despite the win, analysts remain cautious, with a consensus 'Sell' rating and Rs 36 target price.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
SpiceJet shares surge 6% as Supreme Court rejects Maran, KAL Airways' plea seeking ₹1,323 crore damages
Shares of low-cost carrier SpiceJet soared 6 percent in intra-day trading on Wednesday, July 23, after the Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions filed by Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways in a long-running legal dispute. The apex court upheld the Delhi High Court's decision to reject their ₹ 1,323 crore damages claim against the airline, providing much-needed legal relief to the financially stressed carrier. A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar dismissed the special leave petitions filed by KAL Airways and its promoter Kalanithi Maran, effectively closing the door on their efforts to seek damages from SpiceJet over a failed share transfer deal. "Both the special leave petitions are dismissed," the court stated, marking a definitive end to the appeal process. Earlier, the Delhi High Court had declined to condone a 55-day delay in filing and a 226-day delay in re-filing the appeal, citing what it called a 'calculated gamble' by the appellants and accusing them of deliberately concealing facts from the court and SpiceJet. The concept of condonation of delay is governed by the Limitation Act, which typically allows 90 days to file an appeal; any delay beyond that requires a credible explanation—something the courts said was lacking in this case. The dispute originated in 2015 when Maran and KAL Airways transferred their 58.46 percent controlling stake in SpiceJet to its original founder Ajay Singh. The transfer came at a time when the airline was facing a severe financial crisis, prompting Singh to take over operations and liabilities. Maran and KAL later claimed they had paid for convertible warrants and preference shares worth over ₹ 1,300 crore, which they alleged were never issued. The case went into arbitration, where an initial ruling favoured KAL Airways. However, the Delhi High Court subsequently set aside the arbitral award, a decision that was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2024. Following this, KAL Airways and Maran attempted to revive their damages claim through the High Court and later the apex court—both of which rejected their appeals. According to legal news platform Bar and Bench, the Supreme Court found the appellants' conduct to be lacking in good faith and part of a deliberate litigation strategy, rather than a result of negligence or delay. SpiceJet had earlier welcomed the Delhi High Court's decision, stating that a panel of three retired Supreme Court judges had already examined and rejected the damages claim. The airline reiterated that Maran's repeated attempts to revive the case amounted to judicial overreach. The ruling comes at a time when SpiceJet is grappling with financial stress and a shrinking market share amid multiple operational challenges. As of March 2025, the airline reported a net worth of ₹ 683 crore, supported by a ₹ 500 crore equity infusion from its promoter group, which included ₹ 294 crore added in the March quarter. The airline has also entered strategic partnerships with StandardAero and Carlyle Aviation to accelerate engine overhauls and fleet expansion. As part of its summer schedule, SpiceJet launched 24 new domestic flights and added new destinations such as Dehradun, Porbandar, and Tuticorin. By the end of 2025, the airline aims to operate a fleet of 52 aircraft, most of which will be leased on wet or dry terms. Following the Supreme Court verdict, SpiceJet shares rose as much as 6 percent to an intra-day high of ₹ 40.42. However, the stock remains over 49 percent below its 52-week high of ₹ 79.90, touched in September 2024. It recently hit a 52-week low of ₹ 37.87 earlier this month. Over the past year, the stock has declined by 30 percent. The share price has remained under pressure in 2025, falling 12 percent in June and 6.4 percent in May. While April saw a brief recovery with an 8.4 percent gain, the preceding months were also negative—down 11.8 percent in January, 6 percent in February, and 3.4 percent in March. July so far has seen a marginal decline of 0.3 percent.
