MUKTI BASUMALLICK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been preferred for getting family pension because of the death of the husband of the petitioner. The husband of the petitioner expired on 16th August, 1995. The husband of the petitioner retired on 30th September, 1991 from the services of the respondents. The, petitioner has neither received any pension amount nor the family pension and, therefore, the present petition has been preferred.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents has submitted that a detailed counter -affidavit has been filed, wherein, it has been submitted that when the husband of the petitioner retired from the services of the respondents i.e. on 30th September, 1991, there was no scheme for the pension in operation. Contributory Provident Fund Scheme was in existence. The amount towards contributory provident fund has also been paid to the husband of the petitioner.

(3.) IT is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that Family Pension is not payable to the petitioner as the husband of the petitioner was not entitled for the pension, as per Clause 38 in Chapter -VII of the Pension Scheme, 1995 and, therefore, the petitioner is neither entitled for the Family Pension nor the husband of the petitioner is entitled for the any pension amount.