CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Veena Kothavale, Member (J), Sisir Kumar Ratho, Member(A)
Sarojini Jayakar – Appellant
Versus
Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER) – Respondent
OA No. 310/01160 of 2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant seeks family pension and gpf benefits post son's death. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. family pension requires parental dependency under ccs rules. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. gpf settlement delayed; excess interest claimed refundable. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. legal heir entitled to full gpf interest beyond six months. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. family pension claim withdrawn; gpf delay issue remains. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. invalid nomination; legal heirs entitled to gpf. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. delay in terminal benefits warrants interest payment. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 8. interest on delayed gpf payable till actual disbursement. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
ORDER
(Hon'ble Ms. Veena Kothavale, Member(J)
Applicant has filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act seeking to set aside the order dated 03.07.2024 issued by the 3rd respondent and to direct the Respondents to disburse the family pension due on the death of Dr. T.J. Jaisankar, Professor (Sr. Scale) to the applicant with arrears w.e.f. 23.06.2022 along with interest at 12% per annum on pension and the General Provident Fund from the date the payment became due till the date of disbursement as provided under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the General Provident Fund (Central Services) Rules,1960.
2. It is stated that applicant is the mother of Late Dr. Jaisankar who had joined the services in respondent No.1 Institute, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER) on 04.11.1992. While working as Professor (Senior Scale), applicant’s son died in harness on 23.06.2022. Applicant’s son was unmarried and her husband had died in 1978. Applicant was the sole surviving legal heir as per the Legal Heir Certificate dated 10/10/2022. Applicant received a letter dated 21/11/2022 (Annexure A-4) from Senior Administrative Officer, JIPMER enclosing forms for claiming death benefits and the applicant submitted the same accordingly.
3. Vide order dated 03/01/2023, Rs.20,00,000/- was sanctioned towards Death Gratuity and on the same day, AAO issued order to pay Rs. 19,10,109/- towards Gratuity to applicant's bank account after deducting Rs.89,891/- towards overpayment of salary. The earned leave encashment was also disbursed vide sanctioned memo dated 02.02.2023. Except for the payment of Death Gratuity and earned leave encashment, the respondent did not disburse the Provident Fund amount due to her son and the family pension that was due to her. The applicant states that her son was entitled to the benefits of Provident Fund and Pension as per Regulation 41 of JIPMER Regulations, 2008 which provides that those who joined JIPMER prior to 01/01/2002 are entitled to pension and other pensionary benefits under CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 and General Provident Fund Rules 1960.
4. Therefore, applicant gave a representation on 23.03.2023 requesting to disburse the Provident Fund and Pension in accordance with rules. As there was no response from the respondents, applicant got legal notice dated 26.10.2023 issued to the nd respondents. Thereafter, the 2 respondent sent a letter dated 18.12.2023 stating that as per Rule 50(10)(a) of CCS (Pension) Rules 2021, if the Government servant/ pensioner is not survived by the spouse or children then the family pension shall be payable to his/her parent and requested her to submit original legal heir certificate issued by the Tahsildar and personal identification proofs, bank details, etc., for further processing the final settlement of GPF in respect of her son.
5. Pursuant to the letter dated 18.12.2023, a sum of Rs. 69,00,156/- was credited to her account as final settlement of GPF. However no calculation sheet on PF was provided by the respondents. The applicant is entitled to interest on delayed payment of Provident Fund which was not paid.
6. Further, though the 2nd respondent acknowledged the right of applicant for receiving Family Pension in his

Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.