Important Point—When father who was receiving pension under the scheme dies, such benefit of pension should go to mother.

1. By the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner – mother of the deceased employee has made following prayers in para 7:

“7. PRAYER

The Petitioner therefore prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or issue a writ of certiorari and/or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased;

(A) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct respondent Provident Fund Organization to start paying monthly pension amount of Rs.1481 (Rupees one thousands four hundreds eighty one) and also pay unpaid arrear amount of pension from the date of application for transfer of pension i.e. dt. 30.5.2011 till the date of release of pension with interest of 12% as per para 17-A of the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995. ( on March, 2015, the total unpaid arrear amount with interest is Rs.50,354.00 (Rupees fifty thousand three hundred fifty four).

(B) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an interim order to P.F. Organization to start paying pension to the petitioner until the final order is not passed by this Hon’ble Court.

(C) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare that the pension was supposed to be given as dependent pension and not as nominee pension as no nomination was declared by the petitioner's son.

(D) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to order Respondent Provident Fund Organization to pay expense of all the litigation as the arbitrary approach of PF Organization is the reason that petitioner has to approach Hon’ble Gujarat High Court.

(E) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant such other and further relief as the Hon’ble court deems fit and proper.”

2. As per the facts stated in the petition, son of the petitioner late Shri Apurva K. Nanavati was working with M/s. WIN HEALTH CARE (DIVISION WIN MEDI CARE) PVT. LTD. and he was member of Provident Fund and after his death on 29.4.2009, the husband of the petitioner applied for dependent pension on 9.1.2012. However, the respondents gave him nominee pension instead of dependent pension. After some time i.e. on 3.5.2012, husband of the petitioner passed away and the petitioner was left with no earning member in the family. It is the case of the petitioner that on the death of her husband, she became entitled to receive dependent pension from the respondents. However, though she applied for such pension, no response is given to her which results into denial of the benefit of dependent pension to her under the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 (“the Scheme” for short).

3. The petition is opposed by the affidavit in reply inter alia on the ground that the husband of the petitioner claimed nominee pension in Form 10B which was paid to him as per the provisions of para 16(5)(a) of the Scheme and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to receive the dependent pension.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Soneji submitted that the husband of the petitioner had claimed dependent pension and after he was released the pension benefit, he enjoyed such benefits of pension for himself and the petitioner and after his death, as per para 16(5) (aa) of the Scheme, the mother being the surviving dependent-member in the family became entitled to receive the dependent pension. Mr. Soneji submitted that simply because the husband of the petitioner received pension as nominee, such would not prevent the petitioner to apply for and receive the dependent pension as dependent mother of the deceased employee after the death of her husband. Mr. Soneji submitted that para 16(5)(aa) of the Scheme clearly provides for giving pension benefits to the father or mother as dependent of the deceased employee in absence of spouse or children of the deceased employee and when the father and mother are entitled to receive the dependent pension on the demise of the employee, the petitioner mother could not be denied the dependent pension on the death of father of the deceased employee and, therefore, action on the pa