The central legal point established in the judgment is that technical distinctions between the deceased member and deceased pensioner, which are not warranted by the provisions of the Act, should not exclude the actual widow from getting family pension.

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 Union to which the petitioner's husband was the member sent a further representation stating that the petitioner's husband was a regular member of the scheme and was eligible to be covered by the 1995 Pension Scheme. Even though membership ceased after the employment came to an end and was getting monthly pension, but after his death as a pensioner, his wife is entitled to get widow pension. The petitioner was lawfully married to her husband. As per the scheme, she is eligible to get widow pension. When the petitioner sent a letter for reconsideration, the respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 24.4.2006 stating that she is not entitled for widow pension. Challenging the same, the present writ petition came to be filed.

4. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the impugned order nonsuiting the petitioner on the ground that she was the widow of the deceased pensioner and not a widow of the deceased member of the Pension Scheme is legally correct?

5. 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:

(g)"family" means-

[(i) in the case of a male member, his wife, his children, whether married or unmarried, his dependent parents and his deceased son's widow and children:]

Provided that if a member proves that his wife has ceased, under the personal law governing him or the customary law of the community to which the spouses belong, to be entitled to maintenance she shall no longer be deemed to be a part of the members family for the purpose of this Scheme, unless the member subsequently intimates by express notice in writing to the Commissioner that she shall continue to be so regarded; and

[(ii) in the case of a female member, her husband, her children, whether married or unmarried, her dependent parents, her husband's dependant parents, her deceased son's widow and children:]

Provided that if a member by notice in writing to the Commissioner expresses her desire to exclude her husband from the family, the husband and his dependent parents shall no longer be deemed to be a part of the member's family for the purpose of this Scheme, unless the member subsequently cancels in writing any such notice."

6. The term "member" is also defined under Section 2(j) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The term "member" means any member of the Fund. The term "fund" is defined under Section 2(h) of the Act to m