ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER(PENSION) Vs. RANI BODHESWARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the first respondent in W.P.(C)No.12095 of 2009, a writ petition filed by the first respondent herein challenging Ext.P5 letter dated 19.6.2006 sent by the appellant to her husband late Bodheswaran K.U. that his request for change of family/nominee details in the Pension Payment Order cannot be acceded to. By judgment delivered on 25.7.2017, a learned single Judge of this court allowed the writ petition, quashed Ext.P5 and directed the appellant to enter the writ petitioner's name in the Pension Payment Order in the place of the second respondent, for the purpose of granting pensionary benefits. The appellant has, aggrieved thereby, filed this writ appeal. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) The first respondent herein is the wife of late Bodheswaran K.U., a former employee of Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Limited. Bodheswaran was initially married to Rajalekshmi R., the second respondent in the writ petition/writ appeal. After Bodheswaran voluntarily retired from service, he and his wife Rajalekshmi filed a joint petition for divorce before the Family Court, Ernakulam as O.P.No.214 of 2005, under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, praying for a decree dissolving their marriage by mutual consent. A copy of the said application is on record as Ext.P On that application, the Family Court, Ernakulam passed a decree of divorce on 31.3.2005. Ext.P3 is a copy of the order passed in that regard by the Family Court, Ernakulam. Bodheswaran thereafter married the writ petitioner on 30.4.2006. Their marriage was registered on 5.5.2006 under the Hindu Marriage (Kerala) Rules, 1963, by the Registrar of Marriages/Secretary, Angadippuram Grama Panchayat, where the marriage was solemnised. Ext.P4 is a copy of the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar of Marriages/Secretary, Angadippuram Grama Panchayat, under the Hindu Marriage (Kerala) Rules, 1963. Bodheswaran thereafter sent a letter dated 10.5.2006 to the appellant with a request that the name of the writ petitioner, whom he had married on 30.4.2006 after divorcing Rajalekshmi, the second respondent herein, may be substituted in the Pension Payment Order in the place of the second respondent. The appellant rejected that request and communicated his decision to Bodheswaran by Ext.P5 letter dated 19.6.2006. Bodheswaran passed away on 26.10.2008. The first respondent, his wife, thereafter filed W.P.(C)No.12095 of 2009 in this court challenging Ext.P5 and seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) The appellant resisted the writ petition by filing a counter affidavit dated 4.6.2009 wherein it was inter alia contended that in view of paragraph 7.10.1.15 of the Manual of Accounting Procedure, the post retiral spouse cannot be considered as a family member. It was contended that in view of the provisions contained in paragraph 7.10.1.13 of the Manual of Accounting Procedure, he has a statutory duty to release the entire benefits to the second respondent and her children, who alone are entitled to be considered/treated as family members of Bodheswaran as defined in paragraph 2(vii) of the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995. Later, the appellant's counsel filed a statement dated 19.6.2017 wherein it was contended that as the marriage between the writ petitioner and Bodheswaran was solemnised after he had ceased to be a member of the Employees' Pension Scheme, the writ petitioner cannot be treated as a family member of Sri.Bodheswaran. Reliance was placed on the definition of the term "member" occurring in Paragraph 2(ix) and the stipulations in Paragraph 6A of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995. The first respondent further contended that as Bodheswaran had nominated Rajalekshmi to receive widow pension and other benefits, the writ petitioner is not entitled to any relief. The learned single Judge considered the rival contentions and allowed W.P.(C)No.12095 of 2009 by judgment delivered on 25.7.2017. The appellant has, aggrieved thereby, filed this writ appeal.