ZUBAIDA Vs. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition seeking to challenge an order of the respondent Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Vellore, dated 24.4.2006. By the impugned order, the petitioner was informed that she was not entitled for widow pension under the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995.

(2.) IN the writ petition, notice was directed to be issued. Accordingly, Ms.V.J.Latha, learned counsel appeared for the respondent. But, no counter affidavit was filed. The contention of the petitioner was that her husband late Allah Basha was the member of the Family Pension Scheme, 1995. After his retirement, he was getting pension under the said scheme. He married the petitioner on 26.08.2001 after he got retired from service. She and her husband were living together happily. He was also drawing monthly pension. But, unfortunately he died. Hence she had applied for widow pension with the assistance of the Union. By the first communication, dated 5.1.2006, the respondent had informed the union that as per para 16(2)(iii) of the 1995 Pension Scheme, it is payable to the widow of the deceased member and not that of the deceased pensioner. As per para 2(vii) of 1995n Pension Scheme, the term "family" means wife in the case of male member of the scheme and that the petitioner was not the wife of the deceased member at the time of sanction of pension.

(3.) THE stand taken by the respondent is hypertechnical. If it is accepted, then it will exclude the actual widow from getting family pension. THE term "family" is defined under para 2(g) of the Employees Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, which reads as follows: