<br /> <br /> <br /> BY SRI.K. VIJAYAKUMARAN ACHARY, PRESIDENT.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint is filed by the complainant for getting pensionary benefits under EPS 1995 and other reliefs.<br /> <br /> The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows:<br /> <br /> The complainant was the employee of Parvathy Mills Ltd., Kollam vide Reg.No.433, Card NO.675 she was superannuated in November 1994. She was a worker in weaving section and was entitled to every benefit including PF, Gratuity, ESI benefits and pension. The pensionary benefits started in the year1993 and complainant was super annuated in November 1994. Therefore she entitled to pensionary benefits as well. The opp.party who denying pension as there was no rate or no recovery pension for those who have attained the age 50 as on 1.1.19970. The complainant had not attained <br /> the age of 50 and the non recovery was due to fault in the office. The complainant cannot be penalized for the flow in the office and the complainant is entitled to get pension . Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> The first opp.party filed a version contending as follows: The complainant was a subscriber of the EPF Account No. KR/7/433 joined the fund on 1.11.1952. Her date of birth as per the statutory Form No.2 declaration is 10.11.1932. Accordingly she completed 60 years on 10.11.2002 i.e. prior to the commencement of Employees’ Pension Scheme 1995. She was not a member of Employees Family Pension Scheme 1971. The non Family Pension Scheme member who ceased membership in EPF prior to the introduction of Employees Pension Scheme 1995 are not entitled to get pension. As the petitioner retired from service in December 1994 and she was not a member of the Family Pension Scheme of 1971 her case would not come in any of the categories mentioned under para 6 and therefore she is not entitled to get pension. Since the complainant is out of the ambit of Employees’ Pension Scheme 1995 the complainant is not maintainable the membership in Employees Pension Scheme 1995 is covered by para 6, 6A of the Employees Pension Scheme 1995. From the definition of para 6 and 6A it is clear that a Non Family Pension Fund members who ceased Employees Provident Fund membership prior to 6.11.1995 are not eligible for membership under Employees’ Pension Scheme. Since the complainant being a non- Family Pension Scheme member ceased membership in Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme 1952 on 16.11.1995 in para 26A of Employees Provident Fund Scheme 1952 and acquired above 60 years of age prior to the introduction of Employees Pension Scheme 1995 is out of the ambit of the Employees’ Pension Scheme 1995. The complainant during the period of service did not raised any objection about her date of birth . Hence the first opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint.<br /> <br /> <br /> The points that would arise for consideration are:<br /> <br /> [1] Whether the complainant is eligible to get the pensionary benefits under the <br /> EPS 1995.<br /> <br /> [ii] Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties.<br /> [iii] Reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> For the complainant PW.1 is examined and Ext.P1 to P3 are marked.<br /> <br /> For the opp.party DW.1 is examined and Ext.D1 and D2 are marked.<br /> <br /> <br /> Points [I] to [iii]<br /> <br /> <br /> The case of the complaint is that she joined duty as an employee in the Parvathi Mills, Kollam on 19.7.1947 and that she was a member of the Employees Provident Fund bearing account No.KR/7/433. According to the complainant contribution to the Provident Fund Account was being recovered from her pay by the employer and that it is the duty of the employer to make necessary deduction and pay for the Family Pension Fund.<br /> <br /> As a matter of fact no material was produced to show that the complainant was a subscriber to the Employees Pension Scheme 1971 . Ext.P2 is the card showing her subscription towards Employees Provident Fund. Though she would claim that contribution towards Employees Pension Scheme 1971 was also being made nothing to that effect is forthcoming from P2.<br /> <br /> The opp.parties argued that complaint is not entitled to get pension as she is a non Family Pension Scheme 1971 member who ceased membership in employees Provident Fund prior to the introduction of Employees Pension Scheme 1995. According to their the date of birth of the complainant is 10.11.1932 and she completed 60 years on 10.11.1992 ie. Prior to the commencement of Employees Pension Scheme 1995 and such a person would not come within the ambit of Employees Pension Scheme 1995.<br /> <br /> The complainant joined the Employees Provident Fund Scheme on 1.11.1952. She did not join the ceased Family Pension Scheme 1971. She left the service on 30.11.1994 on completion of 60 years. In cross examination PW.1 admitted that after retirement she withdrew Rs.45,000/- the Provident Fund accumulation. The new Employees Pension Scheme 1995 came into existences with effect from 16.11.1995 replacing the Family Pension Scheme1971. Membership in Employees Pension Scheme 1995 is governed by Paras 6 and 6A. On a reading of the above paras it can be seen that non Family Pension Fund members whose Employees Provident Fund Membership ceased prior to 16.11.1995 are not eligible for membership under the Employees Pension Scheme 1995. Therefore we hold that the complainant is not entitled to the benefit of Employees Pension Scheme 1995. The learned counsel for the complainant argued relying on the decision of Hon;ble High Court in Sunil Kumar V. Rajendran Pillai 2007 [3] KLT 343 that it is duty of the employer to pay the subscription etc. But we are of the view that the above decision is not at all applicable in this case. On a careful consideration of the entire evidence in this case are of the view that the complainant is not entitled to get Family Pension as prayed for . Point found accordingly.<br /> <br /> In the result the complaint fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I N D E X<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the complainant<br /> PW.1. – Saraswathy Amma.<br /> <br /> List of documents for the complainant<br /> P1. – Termination Order.<br /> P2. – Provident fund Receipt<br /> P3. – Form 3A<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the opp.party<br /> DW.1. – Ramlath Beevi<br /> <br /> List of documents for the opp.party<br /> D1. – Form No.2<br /> D2. – Form No.3A [Revised]<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />