Adv. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER<br /> <br /> The Complainant prays to direct the 1st opposite party to pay monthly pension under the Employees Pension Scheme dues from 31.07.1994 and to pay compensation and cost. Brief facts of the Complainant’s case in as under: The Complainant who was a worker under the 2nd respondent retired from the factory on 31.07.1994 due to attaining the age of 58. She was a member of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme and is entitled to get the benefit of Employees Provident Fund Pension under the Employees Pension Scheme 1995. Though the Complainant applied for her Pensionary benefits<br /> under the Pension Scheme 1995, the 1st opposite party rejected her pension application. Hence she approached the Forum for relief.<br /> The 1st opposite party contended that the Complainant was not a Family Pension Fund member, did not come under the Employees Pension Scheme 1995. The Complainant has been joined in the Employees Provident Fund Scheme 1952 on 01.04.1963. But she did not opt to join in the Employees Family Pension Scheme 1971 till leaving service and not contributed to that fund. The Complainant filed an option to join the Employees Pension Scheme 1995 in 1998. That option stands as void. As per para 7 explanation the Complainant’s option was rejected. The Complainant is out of the ambit of the Employees Pension Scheme 1995 and the rejection of the Pension application is strictly legal. <br /> <br /> The points that would arise for consideration are:-<br /> <br /> 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opp.party.<br /> 2. Compensation and cost.<br /> Complainant filed affidavit Exhibits P1 to P5 were marked. Pw1 was examined.<br /> The 1st Opp.party filed affidavit. He was examined as Dw1. Exhibits D1 to D3 were marked.<br /> <br /> The case of the Complainant is that she retired from service on 31.07.1994. She is eligible to get the Pensionary benefits under the Employees Pension Scheme 1995. The 1st opposite party contended that as the Complainant was not a member in Employees Family Pension Fund 1971 and also in Employees Pension Fund Scheme 1995, She is not eligible to get Pension. Here the only matter to be decided is whether the Complainant is within the scheme of the Employees Pension Scheme 1995. As per Exhibit D2, the Complainant did not join in Employees Family Pension Scheme 1971 and not contributed to the said scheme. <br /> The Complainant had settled less Employees Provident Fund account on 14.09.1994 and ceased her membership Exhibit D3 shows that the Complainant had filed an option to join the Employees Pension Scheme 1995 on 13.03.1998 ie after 3½ years of causation of Employees Provident Fund member. As per para 26 A the option of the Complainant stands as void. The Complainant who ceased membership in Employees Provident Fund Scheme 1952 and as a non-Family Pension Scheme member is not come under para 6 and she is not eligible to exercise option. From the whole evidence we are of the view that the Complainant is not entitled to get pension. The rejection of her pension application by the 1st opposite party is legal. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The Complainant is entitled to no relief. <br /> <br /> In the result the complaint fails and is dismissed without cost. <br /> <br /> Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> INDEX<br /> List of witness for the complainant<br /> PW1 ; M. Haneefa<br /> Ext. P1: Notice dated 13/03/1998.<br /> Ext. P2: Letter issued by opposite party dated 20/05/1998.<br /> Ext. P3: Annual account statement in the year 1991-1992<br /> Ext. P4: Form 10/D<br /> <br /> -4-<br /> <br /> Ext. P5: Certificate dated 30.07.1994<br /> List of witness for the Opposite party<br /> Dw1 : K.P. Balagopalan Nair<br /> Ext. D1 : <br /> Ext. D2 : <br /> Ext. D3 :<br />