ups_00435 — When the name of the Applicant has been included in the records for the purpose of family pension, it cannot be denied on the pretext that the name of the Applicant is not mentioned in the nomination form for DCRG submitted by the employee long back. Impugned orders are not tenable in the eyes of law and are set aside. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the Applicant for grant of Family Pension in accordance with law

When the name of the Applicant has been included in the records for the purpose of family pension, it cannot be denied on the pretext that the name of the Applicant is not mentioned in the nomination form for DCRG submitted by the employee long back. Impugned orders are not tenable in the eyes of law and are set aside. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the Applicant for grant of Family Pension in accordance with law — The document discusses a case regarding family pension eligibility for a widowed daughter whose father's PPO was issued before 1990. This chunk outlines the guidelines for processing pension claims f... — Facts: The Applicant's father, Bahadur Singh, worked as a Fitter General at the Ordnance Factory, Kanpur from 14-9-1964 to 29-2-1992. The Applicant, a widow, lived with her parents after her husband's death in 2006. The Applicant's father received pension until his death on 29-5-2008. Following her father's death, his wife i.e., the Applicant's mother received the family pension. The Applicant's mother applied in 2015 to include the Applicant's name also in her family details for pension purposes. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issued a health card in 2015 listing the Applicant as a beneficiary. After her mother's death on 3-10-2020, the Applicant applied for a family pension, which was rejected on 9-2-2022. A subsequent appeal on 25-2-2022 was also rejected on 21-3-2022. The Respondents contend that in the service record of the Applicant's father Bahadur Singh's and family nomination form (filed on 15-5-1991), the name of the Applicant has not been included and therefore they have rightly rejected the pension claim of the Applicant. The Applicant filed a rejoinder and contended that after the death of her husband, she was living with her parents and she was wholly dependent on her parents and the source of income was the pension of her father and thereafter her mother. The Applicant also relied upon the OM, dated 22-6-2010 according to which a widowed daughter is also eligible for family pension after the death of her parents. The Applicant further contended that her case has been rejected without proper inquiry.