JUDGMENT : We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Gautam Rakesh, learned Senior Counsel Mrs. M.M. Pal on behalf of the applicant/Private respondent and Mr. B.K. Pathak on behalf of the BSNL i.e., employer. 2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 24.04.2017 rendered by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (Circuit Bench at Ranchi), Employees Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi has preferred this writ petition. 3. The applicant had approached the learned Tribunal for a direction upon the Employees Provident Fund Officer (EPFO for short) to pay pension to the petitioner with interest at par with similarly situated persons within a stipulated period along with its arrears and statutory interest, if any. Learned Tribunal allowed the application, treated the applicant's actual service for the purposes of eligibility as over ten years and directed the EPFO to release the arrears of pension and current monthly pension within a period of two months failing which it shall be liable to pay interest of 8% on the due amount for any delay. Cost of Rs.5,000/-was also imposed on the EPFO. Since applicant had been paid G.P.F. amount, it was directed that the same would be recovered from him in one lump sum while starting the monthly pension. 4. Essentially, the dispute in the instant matter is whether the employee i.e. the applicant/private respondent herein was eligible for pension under the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 or not since he had attained the age of 58 years on 31.12.2010 and whether he shall treated to have completed 10 years of eligible service under the provisions of para-2(ix) read with para-6-A of the EPS, 1995? 5. Facts which are not in dispute are briefly narrated hereunder:- BSNL was covered under the EPS, 1995 by order dated 01.07.2004 giving the cover of the scheme to the employees of BSNL with effect from 01.06.2002. The remittances under the scheme were made to the EPFO containing both the employees and the employers’ contribution, however, till 31.12.2012 since the applicant reached the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years on that date. EPFO however despite receiving the remittances after 31.12.2010 when the applicant had attained 58 years of age, deposited the remittances for the last two years in the Employees Provident Fund Account. In such a situation as per EPFO, applicant was entitled to the withdrawal benefits under para-14 of the EPS, 1995. EPFO however despite receiving the remittances after 31.12.2010 when the applicant had attained 58 years of age, deposited the remittances for the last two years in the Employees Provident Fund Account. In such a situation as per EPFO, applicant was entitled to the withdrawal benefits under para-14 of the EPS, 1995. Rest of the remittances for the period 31.12.2010 to 31.12.2012 were to be paid while computing the Provident Fund claim of the applicant. 6. On the part of the petitioner reliance has been placed on the various provisions of the EPS, 1995 such as Para-2(ix). Definition of “member”; Para-6. “Membership of the Employees' Pension Scheme”; Para-6-A. “Retention of membership”; Para-12. “Monthly member's pension”; Para-12(6)... and Para-14-“Benefits on leaving service before being eligible for monthly member's pension”. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has in particular relied upon the explanation to Para-2(ix) read with para-6(a), para-12(1)(a),(b) and submitted that eligibility to avail superannuation pension is on completion of 10 years of pensionable service till the age of 58 years. If the applicant as per his date of birth recorded with the employer completed less than ten years of service on the date on which he attained the age of 58 years i.e. 31.12.2010, withdrawal benefits provided under para-14 would be permissible to him but not the superannuation benefits even though the employee may have reached the age of superannuation of 60 years as per the retirement age in the BSNL Organisation. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that under Para-16 of the scheme, however, in case of death of a member, the family of the deceased employee is entitled to the benefits under the conditions enumerated thereunder even though the employee may have died before attaining the age of 58 years provided that at least one month's contribution has been paid to the Employees' Pension Fund. Such an exception would not come to the benefit of the employee himself if he has not satisfied the twin conditions of having completed ten years of service before attaining the age of 58 years. On this ground, the findings of the learned Tribunal are vulnerable and fit to be set aside. No exception can be made to the case of one or the other employees as the scheme applies uniformly to all such persons covered thereunder who have become members of the scheme. The impugned order is therefore, fit to be set aside. On this ground, the findings of the learned Tribunal are vulnerable and fit to be set aside. No exception can be made to the case of one or the other employees as the scheme applies uniformly to all such persons covered thereunder who have become members of the scheme. The impugned order is therefore, fit to be set aside. 8. On the part of the employee and BSNL it has been submitted that the remittances made on behalf of the employee and the employer both came to be accepted by the EPFO till the employee attained the age of 60 years. At no point of time, EPFO refused to accept remittances after the employee had attained the age of 58 years or inform the Organisation/Employer that he is not covered under the scheme any longer. Learned Senior Counsel for the employee/applicant has relied upon the definition of clause 2(ii) “actual service” which means the aggregate of periods of service rendered from 16th November, 1995 or from the date of joining any establishment whichever is later to the date of exit from the employment of the establishment covered under the Act. Reliance has been placed upon the definition of “contributory service” under Para-2(iv) which means the period of “actual service” rendered by a member for which the contributions to the fund are received or are receivable. She has further relied upon the definition of “pensionable service” under Para-2(xv) which means the service rendered by the member for which contributions are received or are receivable. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance on the provisions of Para-16-A. “Guarantee of pensionary benefits” which provides that none of the pensionary benefits under this Scheme shall be denied to any member or beneficiary for want of compliance of the requirements by the employer under sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 3 provided, however, that the employer shall not be absolved of his liabilities under the Scheme. 9. It is submitted that there is no denying the fact that applicant was treated as an eligible member under the scheme even though his service details including the date of birth were known to the EPFO as per which he would have attained the age of 58 years by 31.12.2012. 9. It is submitted that there is no denying the fact that applicant was treated as an eligible member under the scheme even though his service details including the date of birth were known to the EPFO as per which he would have attained the age of 58 years by 31.12.2012. EPFO continued to accept remittances in case of this applicant even after 58 years of age till the employee attained the age of 60 years though according to the EPFO, he would not have been eligible for superannuation pension as per the scheme of 1995. Only after superannuation of the employee the EPFO has taken a U-turn which is neither proper nor equitable. 10. Learned counsel for the BSNL has submitted that not only in the case of this employee but all other employees covered under the EPS, 1995, remittances containing the contribution of both the employee and the employer have been duly made and accepted by the EPFO irrespective of their attaining the age of 58 years till their retirement on attaining the age of 60 years. Denial of superannuation pension after accepting the remittances till such employee has attained the age of 60 years is not proper in the eye of law and amounts to denial of lawful pensionary dues of such an employee eligible and covered under the scheme of 1995. Therefore, the impugned directions do not suffer from any error on facts or in law which deserve interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 11. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gone through the relevant provisions of the EPS, 1995 and the pleadings on record including the impugned order of the learned CAT. We may straightaway refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Otis Elevator Employees' Union S. Reg. & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.; (2003) 12 SCC 68 where the Apex Court upheld the validity of the EPS, 1995, paragraph-3 and 12 to 14 in particular while rejecting the contention that they are unreasonable, arbitrary and discriminatory. The Apex Court held that the scheme has been framed in exercise of the statutory power of the Government. While dealing with the case of the parties, it was further held at para-21 and 22 as under: “21. The Apex Court held that the scheme has been framed in exercise of the statutory power of the Government. While dealing with the case of the parties, it was further held at para-21 and 22 as under: “21. The next contention urged is that analysis of member movement indicated in the value report suggests a very small percentage of persons deriving the benefit of pension on superannuation in view of cases of exit on retirement prior to superannuation age or voluntary retirement at younger age of cessation. The Scheme contemplates payment of pension benefit to the members as under: (i) superannuation pension on attaining the age of 58 years; (ii) retirement pension on leaving the job before attaining the age of 58 years but not before 50 years of age; and (iii) invalidity pension without any eligibility requirement and age bar. 22. In addition to the above, the member on leaving the service before becoming entitled to pension payment is entitled to the following benefits vide paragraph 14 of the Scheme: (i) Withdrawal benefit as per Table D if the member leaves the service on attaining the age of 58 years without putting in 10 years’ eligible service. (ii) In case of leaving the service before attaining the age of 58 years without putting in eligible period of service entitling pension, the member has the option of either obtaining the scheme certificate and retaining the membership for adding future entitlement or availing the withdrawal benefit and quitting the membership of the Scheme. In the event a member obtains a scheme certificate he retains his membership and remains covered for pensionary benefit to the family in case of his death. As such, every member and all family members dependent upon the member are entitled to either pensionary or withdrawal benefit and no one is left with no benefit at all as alleged.” 12. The vires of any of the provisions of EPS, 1995 are not in question before us in this writ petition. Moreover, the Apex court has in the case of Otis Elevator Employees' Union S. Reg. (supra) examined the vires of certain paragraphs of the scheme and upheld its constitutional validity. We may usefully refer to some of the provisions of the EPS, 1995 in order to answer the question posed at the outset while dealing with the contention of the parties. (supra) examined the vires of certain paragraphs of the scheme and upheld its constitutional validity. We may usefully refer to some of the provisions of the EPS, 1995 in order to answer the question posed at the outset while dealing with the contention of the parties. The relevant provisions of the scheme are as under:- “Para-2(ii) “actual service” means the aggregate of periods of service rendered from the 16th November, 1995 or from the date of joining any establishment whichever is later to the date of exit from the employment of the establishment covered under the Act; Para-2(iv) “contributory service” means the period of “actual service” rendered by a member for which the contributions to the fund have been [received or are receivable]; Para-2 (v) “eligible member” means an employee who is eligible to join the Employees' Pension Scheme; Para-2(vi) “existing member” means an employee who is eligible to join the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1971; Para-2(ix) “member” means an employee who becomes a member of the Employees' Pension Fund in accordance with the provisions of this Scheme; [Explanation.-An employee shall cease to be the member of Pension Fund from the date of attaining 58 years of age or from the date of vesting admissible benefits under the Scheme, whichever is earlier;] Para-2(xv) “pensionable service” means the service rendered by the member for which contributions have been [received or are receivable]; Para-6. Membership of the Employees' Pension Scheme.-Subject to subparagraph (3) of paragraph 1, this Scheme shall apply to every employee,- (a) who on or after the 16th November, 1995 becomes a member of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 or of the Provident Funds of the factories and other establishments exempted by the appropriate Government under section 17 of the Act, or in whose case exemption has been granted under paragraph 27 or 27-A of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 [and whose pay on such date is less than or equal to fifteen thousand rupees], from the date of such membership; (b) who has been a member of the ceased Employees' Family Pension Scheme, 1971 before the commencement of this Scheme from 16th November, 1995; (c) who ceased to be a member of the Employees' Family Pension Scheme, between 1st April, 1993, and 15th November, 1995, and opts to exercise his option under paragraph 7; (d) who has been a member of the Employees' Provident Fund or of Provident Funds of Factories and other establishments exempted by the appropriate Government under section 27 or 27-A of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, on 15th November, 1995, but not being a member of the ceased Employees' Family Pension Scheme, 1971, opts to exercise his option under paragraph 7. Para-[6-A. Retention of membership-A member of the Employees' Pension Fund shall continue to be such member till he attains the age of 58 years or he avails the withdrawal benefit to which he is entitled under para 14 of the Scheme, or dies, or the pension is vested in him in terms of para 12 of the Scheme, whichever is earlier.] Para-9-Determination of eligible service-The eligible service shall be determined as follows:- (a) In the case of “new entrant” the “actual service” shall be treated as eligible service. The total actual service shall be rounded off to the nearest year. The fraction of service for six months or more shall be treated as one year and the service less than six months shall be ignored. Explanation.-In the case of employees employed seasonally in any establishment the period of [“contributory service”] in any year, notwithstanding that such service is less than a year shall be treated as a full year. The fraction of service for six months or more shall be treated as one year and the service less than six months shall be ignored. Explanation.-In the case of employees employed seasonally in any establishment the period of [“contributory service”] in any year, notwithstanding that such service is less than a year shall be treated as a full year. (b) In the case of the “existing member” the aggregate of actual service and the “past service” shall be treated as eligible service: Provided that if there is any period in the “past service” for which the contributions towards the Family Pension Scheme, 1971 has not been received, the said period shall count as eligible service only if the contributions thereof have been received in the Employees' Pension Fund. [Explanation.-For the purpose of this sub-paragraph, the aggregate of actual service and past service for less than six months shall be ignored and six months and above shall be rounded off to a year.] Para-10-Determination of pensionable service.-(1) The pensionable service of the member shall be determined with reference to the contributions [received or receivable] on his behalf in the Employees' Pension Fund. (2) In the case of the member who superannuates on attaining the age of 58 years, [and] who has rendered 20 years pensionable service or more, his pensionable service shall be increased by adding a weightage of 2 years. Para-12-“Monthly member’s pension-(1) A member shall be entitled to- (a)-superannuation pension, if he has rendered eligible service of 10 years or more and retires on attaining the age of 58 years; (b)-early pension, if he has rendered eligible service of 10 years or more and retires or otherwise ceases to be in the employment before attaining the age of 58 years. Para-12[(7-B)(a)] A member who has attained the age of fifty-eight years and is otherwise eligible for pension under clause (a) of sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph, if he so desires, may be allowed to defer the age of drawing pension later than fifty-eight years but not beyond sixty years of age. Para-12[(7-B)(a)] A member who has attained the age of fifty-eight years and is otherwise eligible for pension under clause (a) of sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph, if he so desires, may be allowed to defer the age of drawing pension later than fifty-eight years but not beyond sixty years of age. Para-14-Benefits on leaving service before being eligible for monthly member's pension-if a member has not rendered the eligible service specified in sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 12 on the date of exit, or on attaining the 58 years of age, whichever is earlier, such member shall be entitled to a withdrawal benefit as laid down in Table 'D' or may opt to receive the Scheme certificate provided on the date he has not attained 58 years of age: Provided that for calculating such withdrawal benefit, the wages at exit shall be the weighted average of his wages at the end of every wage ceiling period: Provided further that an existing member shall receive additional return of contributions for his past service under the Employees' Family Pension Scheme, 1971, computed as withdrawal-cum-retirement benefits as per Table “A” multiplied by the factor given in Table “B”. Para-16-Benefits to the family on the death of a member-(1) [Pension to the Family] shall be admissible from the date following the date of death of the member, if the member dies- (a) while in service, provided that at least one month's contribution has been paid into the Employees' Pension Fund, or (b) after the date of exit, but before attaining the age of 58 years, from the employment having rendered service entitling him/her to monthly member's pension but [before the commencement of pension payment, or] (c) after commencement of payment of the monthly member's pension. Note.-The cases where a member has rendered less than 10 years eligible service on the date of exit but has retained the membership of the Pension Fund, and dies before attaining the age of 58 years, shall be regulated under sub-paragraph (8) of paragraph 12. Para-16-A. Guarantee of pensionary benefits.-None of the pensionary benefits under this Scheme shall be denied to any member or beneficiary for want of compliance of the requirements by the employer under subparagraph (1) of paragraph 3 provided, however, that the employer shall not be absolved of his liabilities under the Scheme. 13. Para-16-A. Guarantee of pensionary benefits.-None of the pensionary benefits under this Scheme shall be denied to any member or beneficiary for want of compliance of the requirements by the employer under subparagraph (1) of paragraph 3 provided, however, that the employer shall not be absolved of his liabilities under the Scheme. 13. It is not in doubt that the eligibility of the applicant to join the Employees Pension Scheme was not a matter of dispute. The question involved is whether he is entitled to avail the superannuation benefits on failing to fulfill the conditions described under Para-6-A-and Para-12(1)(a). Definition of “member” under Para-2(ix) and its Explanation provides that an employee shall cease to be the member of Pension Fund from the date of attaining 58 years of age or from the date of vesting admissible benefits under the Scheme, whichever is earlier. Similar is the provision under Para-6-A relating to “Retention of membership”. A member of the Employees' Pension Fund would continue to be such member till he attains the age of 58 years or he avails the withdrawal benefit to which he is entitled under para 14 of the Scheme, or dies, or the pension is vested in him in terms of para 12 of the Scheme, whichever is earlier. 14. Para-9 prescribed the “Determination of eligible service”. A reading of the instant paragraph, quoted above, shows that 'actual service' shall be treated as eligible service and it shall be rounded out to the nearest year with fractions of six months or more of service to be treated as one year and if they are less than six months, they shall be ignored. 15. Since the BSNL was covered under the EPS, 1995 as per the notification dated 29.06.2004 with effect from 01.06.2002, therefore, the question of counting past service of an “existing member” is not in contemplation in the present case. Emphasis has been laid on behalf of the applicant to the definition of “actual service” as referred to at Para-2(ii) read with Para-9; “contributory service” [Para-2(iv)] and also “pensionable service” [Para-2(xv)] in order to advance the submission that actual service rendered by the employee would be from the date of joining establishment till the exit from the employment of the establishment and that is up to the age of 60 years i.e. the retirement age. A condition to restrict the actual service till 58 years of age would therefore be not only in teeth of the provisions of the EPS, 1995 but also an arbitrary restriction of superannuation age of the employee. Therefore, once the EPFO has continued to receive the remittances till the employee attained the age of 60 years, it would be improper and impermissible on the part of the EPFO to take a volte-face and refuse to extend pensionary benefits to the employee. 16. We have examined the contention of the petitioners, the applicant/Private respondent and also BSNL in light of provisions of the scheme of 1995 and also the opinion of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Otis Elevator Employees' Union S. Reg. (supra). As per the principles governing interpretation of statutes provisions of the scheme or the statute should not be read in isolation but in the context of the whole scheme and its object and reasons. In the instant case, the expressions “actual service” [Para-2(ii)], “contributory service” [Para-2(iv)], “pensionable service” [Para-2(xv)] have to be read with the provisions enumerated under Para-2(ix) Explanation; Para-6-A, Para-12(1)(a) and 12(1)(b), Para-12[(7-B)(a)] and Para-14 also of the scheme. On a conjoint reading of the provisions of the Employees Pension Scheme of 1995, it is clear that a member would cease to be a 'member' on attaining the age of 58 years. He would be entitled to superannuation pension only if he has rendered eligible service of ten years or more before attaining the age of 58 years. The 'actual service' in such a case would be treated till the member has attained the age of 58 years. The provisions of the scheme are not in question and have been upheld by the Apex Court as noted above. In case the employee has not rendered the eligible service specified in Para-12(1) on the date of exit or on attaining the age of 58 years, whichever is earlier, Para-14 provides for withdrawal benefits to such a member as per the prescribed rates at Table 'D'. Acceptance of the remittances beyond the age of 58 years by the EPFO or its Officials are routinely made as has been explained by the learned counsel for the petitioner since it would be wholly impracticable to separate individual cases considering the huge number of employees i.e. about six crores, who have joined the scheme as member. Acceptance of the remittances beyond the age of 58 years by the EPFO or its Officials are routinely made as has been explained by the learned counsel for the petitioner since it would be wholly impracticable to separate individual cases considering the huge number of employees i.e. about six crores, who have joined the scheme as member. In such cases, EPFO deposits the remittances of such an employee/employer in the Provident Fund Account of the employee which are payable when the provident fund dues of such an employee is finalized. It is the case of the EPFO that acceptance of such remittances after attaining the age of 58 years would not entitle an employee to avail of the pensionary benefits in case he has not completed ten years of actual service till the age of 58 years. Such acceptances could not be in derogation of the provisions of the statutory scheme framed under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and has received the stamp of constitutionality by the Apex Court. In any case, any such remittances accepted after the age of 58 years in the case of the applicant have to be refunded to him as Provident Fund dues but not as 'Pension'. We find merit in the submissions of the petitioner since neither the EPFO nor the employer/employee is permitted to derogate from the express provisions of the EPS, 1995 which has the color of a statutory scheme having been framed under the Act of 1952. The Scheme itself provides for withdrawal benefits (as per the rates prescribed under Table 'D') in case a member has not rendered the eligible service of 10 years as specified under Para-12(i) on the date of exit or on attaining the age of 58 years, whichever is earlier. In the present case it is not disputed that the employee had completed only 8 years and 7 months till he attained 58 years of age as on 31.12.2010 and thereby had not completed 10 years of service by the age of 58 years to be eligible for superannuation pensions. 17. Having examined the provisions of EPS, 1995, in the light of the opinion of the Apex Court, it is clear that entitlement of an employee like the applicant for pension under the EPS, 1995 would be strictly in terms of the scheme and permits no derogation. 18. 17. Having examined the provisions of EPS, 1995, in the light of the opinion of the Apex Court, it is clear that entitlement of an employee like the applicant for pension under the EPS, 1995 would be strictly in terms of the scheme and permits no derogation. 18. Having conferred our anxious consideration to the contentions of the parties including the applicant/employee and the employer BSNL, we are of the firm opinion that the learned Tribunal failed to take notice of the correct position in law, and erroneously held in favour of the applicant as entitled to the benefits of the EPS, 1995 by being simply guided by the acceptance of remittances on the part of the EPFO, of the employee/employer contribution beyond the age of 58 years till the applicant attained the age of 60 years i.e. the superannuation age of the employee under the BSNL. We are therefore, satisfied that the impugned decision cannot be upheld in the eye of law or on facts. The question posed at the outset is answered accordingly. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. 19. Needless to say, the EPFO shall release the admissible benefits, if not yet released, to the applicant/employee in accordance with law with statutory interest, if any, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The breakup of such admissible dues shall also be communicated to the employee. Writ Petition is allowed accordingly.