SANDHNA PRASAD Vs. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the widow of late Gopi Raman Prasad, an employee working in Category IIIrd post in the office of respondent No. 3, FCI. The petitioner died in harness in 1992 and thereafter the petitioner was getting family pension. Now the petitioners grievance is that after the revision of family pension the petitioner is entitled to get family pension after re -fixation according to revised pension scheme which came into effect from 1.2.1992.

(2.) MR . Satis Buxi, learned counsel for the respondent, very fairly submitted that the petitioner is entitled to revised family pension and steps shall be taken for pay - ment of the same. It is stated in the counter affidavit filed by the FCI that the difference in the contribution i.e. both employers contribution and employee contribution has to be deposited and the petitioner is to fulfil the requirement in order to get the revised family pension. Mr. M.A. Khan learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready to deposit the requisite amount so directed by the respondents.

(3.) PETITION disposed of.