ups_00475 — When an employee is not eligible for pension (due to less qualifying service) on his demise, the spouse is not entitled to family pension

When an employee is not eligible for pension (due to less qualifying service) on his demise, the spouse is not entitled to family pension — Case challenge: Non-grant of family pension after employee's demise due to less qualifying service The chunk discusses the applicant's argument that his wife, a government employee at All India Inst... — Facts:The challenge in this case is non-grant of Family Pension. The Applicant's wife late Smt. Surekha P. Moone was working as Sister (Grade-I) under All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Ansari Nagar, New Delhi. She had completed pensionable period of service but due to breast cancer died on 7-8-2007. The Applicant was residing with her at New Delhi at that time. Before her death she was residing with her brother Shri Ratan Khairkar. On 19-7-2007, she executed a will-deed appointing Smt.Panchasheela Ratan Khairkar as guardian of minor son Shri Siddhant Prashant Moone and nominated Smt. Panchasheela Ratan Khairkar as entitled to receive all pensionary benefit money in her other account and returns receivable under LIC Policy, custody of her ornaments. Late Smt.Surekha P. Moone also submitted nomination form on 7-8-2007 for her GPF, Death-cum- Retirement Gratuity, Central Government Employees, Insurance Scheme and family pension with 100% share for her son. After death of late Smt. Surekha P. Moones, when the Respondents did not release her pensionary benefits, the Applicant filed Writ Petition No. 5921 of 2007 before Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court for direction to the Respondents to consider his claim for compassionate appointment and for releasing pensionary benefits. This Writ Petition was disposed of on 10-1-2008 directing Respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of the Applicant on its own merit according to law and procedure and in view of those directions the Writ Petition was withdrawn by the Applicant. The Applicant's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds was rejected by the Respondents on 31-8-2009 stating that he cannot be treated as dependant of late Smt. Surekha P. Moone in view of her will-deed, dated 19-7-2007 and therefore, he cannot be provided appointment on compassionate grounds. Thereafter the Applicant filed MIC. No.3 of 2008 before Principal District Judge, Wardha under provisions of Guardian and Ward Act to declare him as guardian of his minor son as well as property. The District Judge rejected his claim for guardianship of property of the minor and only gave custody of the minor son. The Applicant filed First Appeal No. 1101 of 2010 in the Nagpur Bench of the High Court which was decided on 13-12-2010 directing the Respondents to see that the other properties of the minor son remain secured till he attains majority and thereafter hand over the properties to him. But the present Applicant's appeal for appointing him as guardian of property of the minor child was rejected. Another Writ Petition No. 3684 of 2011 was decided by the High Court on 12-3-2012 directing the Respondent No. 2 to take appropriate decision on representations made by the present Applicant about payment of pension to deceased wife of the present Applicant and to her minor son. Thereafter the Respondent No. 1 rejected the present Applicant's representation on 16-3-2013 which has been impugned in this OA. The Respondents then informed the Applicant that as per Rule 81(2)(b)(i)(vii), of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, it has been decided to release entire service benefits to the minor son under guardianship of Smt. Panchasheela R. Khairkar but the monetary benefit has not yet been made to the minor son. Therefore, this OA has been filed. The version of the Applicant that provisions of Provident Fund Act, 1952 shall apply to the Provident Fund set up under the AIIMS Act, 1956 and it will be treated as Government Provident Fund. Thereafter, Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 was framed. Under that Scheme, family has been defined as wife in the case of male member of the Employees Pension Fund; husband in the case of female member of the Employees Pension Fund; and sons and daughters of a member of the Employees Pension Fund. Since the Applicant's wife was working as employee of the IIMS, New Delhi, the Applicant as her husband is the only person eligible to receive pensionary benefits; Under Rule 54 (14)

(b) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, definition of “Family” has also been covered. The family pension is admissible to an employee and after his / her death, the pension cannot be treated as an estate and it cannot be treated as testamentary disposition. Pension is Statutory right of the widow / widower, receivable on account of death of a Government servant. Pension is a right accrued under the statute, is not a self-acquired property which can be disposed of as movable or immovable property; nomination of any person other than widow or widower of deceased employee during his lifetime for payment of family pension is void. Therefore, will of deceased Smt.Surekha P. Moone should not have alienated the Applicant's right for receiving pension in various Supreme Court decisions such as in the case of Smt. Violet Issaac v. Union of India, [ 1991 (1)SCC 725 ]; Jodhsingh v. Union of India [ 1980 (4) SCC 306 ]; Rajkumari v. Krishna [ 2015 (14) SCC ] 511 and Nitu v. Sheela Rani [ 2016(16) SCC 229 ], it has been held that family pension cannot he bequeathed by will as it does not form part of estate of the employee / ex-employee. The District Court, Wardha granted custody of minor son to the Applicant from 2008 and since then the Applicant has been taking care of his son. Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court also upheld the order of the District Court that when natural guardian is alive deceased while could not have appointed any other person as natural guardian of the minor. The Applicant has become major in the year 2023 and he is entitled to get entire monetary benefits and the OA should be allowed by granting the reliefs sought. As per Supreme Court decision in G.L. Bhatia v. Union of India and another, dated 23-4-1999 [ (1999) 5 SCC 237 ] under CCS (Pension) Rules, the widower even though staying separately and excluded in the nomination is entitled to family pension, the nomination contrary to the statute is inoperative. Counsel for Respondents in the reply and during arguments contended that in the will executed by Late. Smt. Surekha P. Moone on 19-7-2007 and nominations made by her on 7-8-2007 for GPF, DCRG, CGEGIS and family pension was in favour of her minor son Sidhant Prashant Moone. She had also nominated her sister-in-law Smt. Panchasheela R. Khairkar as guardian of her son. The Committee constituted by the AIIMS, New Delhi considered the representation submitted by the Applicant and relying upon the above documents of nomination submitted by late Smt. Surekha P. Moone found the present Applicant as not suitable candidate for appointment on compassionate grounds. Accordingly, the Applicant was informed by AIIMS Letter, dated 31-8-2009. In view of the fact that in the decision of the District Judge, Wardha in MJC No. 3 of 2008, the Applicant was allowed only partial relief, the will of the deceased Smt. Surekha P. Moone would prevail in which she had bequeathed the entire benefits in favour of her son Sidhant. Provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 are applicable to employees of AIIMS, New Delhi and family pension is payable as provided under Rule 54(6) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Family pension is payable in case of widow or widower after the death or re-marriage and in case of unmarried son until he attains majority or until he gets married or starts earning his livelihood, whichever is earliest. Smt. Surekha P. Moone was the deceased employee and neither a pensioner nor a family pensioner. As per Rule 81 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, family pension can be sanctioned only on death of a pensioner, Since for family pension, Late. Smt. Surekha P. Moone had nominated her son with Smt. Pancshasheela R. Khairkar as guardian of her minor son, it has been decided to release service benefits to her son as per the decision of District Judge, Wardha in M.J.C. No.3 of 2008. A dependent family member of a deceased Government employee can become eligible for family pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. As explained by the Respondents, provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 are applicable to employees of AIIMS, New Delhi and family pension is payable under 54 (6) of CCS (Pension) Rules. Late Smt. Surekha P. Moone was an employee under AIIMS, New Delhi but she was neither a pensioner nor a family pensioner. Under provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, a Central Government employee becomes eligible for sanction of pension only after completion of 20 years of service. As per details given in the nomination forms submitted by Late Smt. Surekha P. Moone, she joined service under the AIIMS, New Delhi on 12-3-1996 and she expired on 7-8-2007. Thus she had completed in service only 11 years and 5 months. Therefore, before her death she had not become eligible for grant of pension to her. When she had not become eligible for grant of pension, after her death, family pension also cannot be granted to any of her dependent family members. Thus family pension can be sanctioned to nominated dependent family member of an ex-employee, only if that employee was eligible for grant of pension. When late Smt. Surekha P. Moone had not become eligible for sanction of pension, the Applicant does not acquire any eligibility for sanction of family pension to him. For release of benefits under GPF, DCRG, CGEGIS and family pension, late Smt. Surekha P. Moone had submitted nomination forms to the Respondents on 7-8-2007. She wrongly submitted the nomination for pension.