REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER vs MOLY K. THOMAS & ANR.

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 18.06.2011 passed by the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram (in short, ''the State Commission'') in Appeal No.505/2009 2011 - Regional P.F. Commissioner Vs. Moly K. Thomas & anr. by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District forum allowing complaint was upheld.

Brief facts of the case are that the complainants/respondents are legal heirs of late K.M. Thressiamma who was employee of Central State Farm Aralam. Deceased mother of the complainants'' was a subscriber of E.P.F. scheme. Mother of the complainant died on 9.2.2003 and father of complainants predeceased the mother. Complainant applied for pension which was denied by OP/petitioner on the ground that they have attained age of 25 years on the death of their mother. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. OP resisted complaint and submitted that as per provisions of Para 16 (3)(c) of Employees Pension Scheme, 1995, pension is payable to children till the age of 25 years and after that children are disentitled for pension and complainants are neither eligible for children pension nor for orphan pension as they have already attained age of 25 years and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP to sanction orphan pension from 9.2.2003 and pay arrears along with Rs.2,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as cost of litigation. Appeal filed by OP was dismissed by learned State commission vide impugned order against which this revision petition has been filed.

None appeared for respondents even after service of notice and they were proceeded ex-parte.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused record.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Clause 16(3) (c ) of the scheme, children pension was payable only upto to the age of 25 years even then learned District Forum committed error in allowing orphan pension under clause 16 (4) (a) and learned State Commission further committed error in dismissing appeal; hence, revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside.

Clause 16 (3) (c) of the scheme provides that monthly children pension was payable until the child attains the age of 25 years, meaning thereby the children who have attained age more than 25 years is not entitled to pension. Learned State Commission has upheld order of District Forum on the basis of Clause 16 (4) ( a) of the scheme which provides pension to children as orphan pension which does not reflect age of orphan. Clause 16 (4) (a) runs as under:

"If the deceased member is not survived by any widow but is survived by children falling within the definition of family or if the widow pension is not payable, the children shall be entitled to a monthly orphan pension equal to 75 per cent of the amount of the monthly widow pension as payable under sub-paragraph (2) (a) (i) provided that minimum monthly orphan pension for each orphan shall not be less than Rs.250 per month.

Perusal of aforesaid case reveals that this clause is applicable only when male person is member of the scheme and is not survived by any widow, but is survived by children whereas in the case in hand complainant''s mother was member of the employees scheme who died on 9.2.2003 and her husband had already died. In such circumstances, clause 16 (4) (a) was not applicable at all and complainants were not entitled to pension as orphan under Clause 16 (4) (a) scheme. If I agree with the reasons given by learned State Commission then every children who has lost his/her parents being member of the scheme will get orphan pension till he/she survives which cannot be intention of Legislature.

As Clause 16(3) ( c) of the scheme restricts pension to children upto the age of 25 years and as complainants had already attained age of 25 years, they were not entitled to pension and

learned District forum committed error in allowing complaint and learned State Commission further committed error in dismissing appeal and revision petition is to be allowed.

Consequently, revision petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and order dated 18.06.2011 passed by the learned State Commission in Appeal No.505/2009 2011 - Regional P.F. Commissioner Vs. Moly K. Thomas & anr. and order of District Forum dated 31.03.2009 passed in OP No. 82/2005 - Moly K. Thomas & anr. Regional P.F. Commissioner is set aside and complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.