Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
D Devi vs Central Public Works Department on 22 March, 2024
1
OA.No.704/2021
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.020/00704/2021
ORDER RESERVED ON 01.03.2024
DATE OF ORDER: 22.03.2024
CORAM:
HON'BLE MRS. SHALINI MISRA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Smt.D.Devi (widow) aged 39 years
Occ: Unemployed, W/o Late D.Ranjith Kumar Yadav
Ex-AE(E) CPWD, Group 'B', Res of C/o K.Sridhar
D.No.3-93, Yadav Street, near Nerelamma Temple
Indrapalem, Kakinada, East Godavari District
A.P., Cell No.9032607284
Email ID: [email protected] .....Applicant
(By Advocate Sri G.Pavana Murthy)
Vs.
UOI rep by its
1. The Special Director General
Southern Region CPWD, Chennai.
2. The Superintending Engineer cum Project Director
CPWD, Yogakshema Building, Beach Road
NITK Project Circle, NITK campus
Suratkal, Mangaluru - 575025.
3. The Executive Engineer (E)
CPWD, Yogakshema Building, Beach Road
NITK Project Circle, NITK campus
Suratkal, Mangaluru - 575025.
4. Deputy Controller of Accounts
Pay and Accounts Office
CPWD(S.Z) Rajaji Bhawan
Besant Nagar, Chennai-90.
5. Smt. D.Rajeswari W/o Narasimha Rao
Retd., Sub-inspector of Police, Govt. of AP
H.No.21-13-29, Nethaji Road
Madhura Nagar, Vijayawada - 520011
Krishna Dist. ....Respondents
2
OA.No.704/2021
(By Advocate Smt.K.Rajitha, Senior Panel Counsel for Central Government)
ORDER
PER: HON'BLE MRS. SHALINI MISRA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. The applicant has filed the present OA with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay the General Provident Fund(GPF) amount pending with the department of her husband/deceased employee as she is the only dependent who is eligible to receive it with interest from 01.08.2020 till date.
2. The applicant in this case is wife of late D.Ranjit Kumar Yadav, Ex-Assistant Engineer (E) Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Surathkal, Mangaluru. The deceased employee was initially appointed in CPWD as Junior Engineer on 19.04.2003 and subsequently promoted as Assistant Engineer (Electrical) on 01.07.2014 and posted at 3rd respondent office at Mangaluru. While the deceased was returning with his family from Vijayawada to Surathkal, Mangalore to his work place on 01.08.2020, he met with road accident at Kodavalur Police limits (Nellore Dist) and suffered grievous injuries and died on the spot and the applicant and two children suffered with minor injuries. Since the applicant is the wife of the deceased employee, the 3rd respondent issued a letter dated 03.08.2020 declaring that the applicant is entitled to take treatment at CGHS empanelled hospitals. Further the Revenue Department of Andhra Pradesh has issued family member certificate dated 12.09.2020 declaring that the applicant and his two children are only the family members of the deceased. While so, the 5th respondent i.e. her mother-in-law has issued a legal notice dated 21.09.2020 to the 3rd respondent requesting not to pay the death benefits and other service benefits of the deceased employee to 3 OA.No.704/2021 anybody or else she would initiate legal action on 3rd respondent. It is submitted that the consequent on the death of the deceased employee and as per the Gratuity Act and Central Govt. Service/Pension Rules, the 4th respondent has paid an amount of Rs.14,30,480 to the applicant treating her as legally wedded wife vide PPO dated 24.05.2021. Further other death/service benefits such as CGEGIS, leave salary account of deceased employee, saving fund under CGEGIS have been paid to the applicant vide office order dated 23.07.2021 & 23.08.2021. The 3rd respondent vide his letter dated 19.08.2021 has granted provisional family pension to the applicant in accordance with Rule 80-A of CCS(Pension) Rules 1972. With this effect, the 4th respondent has issued Pension Payment Order dated 18.08.2021 commencing family pension to the applicant w.e.f. 02.08.2020. The 4th respondent in his letter dated 24.08.2021 has granted payment of arrears of family pension to the applicant to the extent of Rs.4,78,699 for the period from 02.08.2020. As the applicant has received almost all the service/death benefits of the deceased employee except GPF amount, when the same is verified for non-payment of GPF amount, it is orally said that the said amount will be paid to only nominee declared by the employee. Having come to know the reasons for non payment of GPF amount, the applicant wrote a letter dated 09.09.2021 requesting the 3rd respondent to pay the GPF amount, in spite of the deceased employee had updated his family/nominee particulars to enter in service records, it is still not clear as to why the nominee papers in GPF forms are not changed. The applicant once again in her representation dated 01.10.2021 requested the 3rd respondent to release the GPF amount in favour of the applicant based on the latest family/dependent particulars submitted by the deceased employee. Aggrieved 4 OA.No.704/2021 by inaction of the respondent in not granting the GPF amount even after lapse of more than one year, the applicant has filed the present OA.
3. The applicant further submits that as per the Employees Provident Fund Rules 1952, the 5th respondent does not come under the definition of family of the deceased employee. As such the nomination declaring the 5th respondent as her nominee to receive Provident Fund is against the rules in force. The 5th respondent after the death of the deceased employee started harassing the applicant and with ill motive, she is causing hardship to the applicant. The applicant being unemployed and having no source of income and not having any assets, has to take care of two minor children. Until the department pays full benefits of her late husband, it will be difficult for the applicant to survive. The deceased employee got employment in the department on 19.04.2003 at which time, he was unmarried and in all the service records, the petitioner name was not reflected. As soon as he got married and children born, the deceased has upgraded his family particulars in all financial benefits admissible to the family of the employee from time to time. As per Central Civil Service Pension Rules 54(12) form-3, the Central Govt. employee needs to submit his family details in order to get family pension to the family members on demise of the employee. The deceased has submitted the same under Form-3 as on 28.04.2017 regarding family members detail wherein he has submitted his wife name(the applicant herein), his two children as family members as such the parents of the deceased will not come under the definition of dependents. The applicant and two minor children are entitled for all the benefits of the deceased employee being legal heirs/dependents on the deceased employee. 5 OA.No.704/2021
4. On notice, the respondents have filed their reply statement wherein they submit that as per the record available in service book of Late Sri D.Ranjit Kumar Yadav(deceased employee/applicant's husband), in Form-III/ Form Nomination submitted on 16.03.2005, the GPF nominee mentioned as Smt.Rajeswari i.e. respondent No.5. Further as per Service Book which is updated on 28.04.2017 by the deceased employee updating family members/nominee details in Form-3 under Rule 54(12) of CCS Pension Rules, the family pension would be provided to the applicant and her children. Accordingly, the applicant is not entitled to the relief as prayed for and the OA is liable to be dismissed.
5. Nobody represented the 5th respondent. Notice issued to the 5th respondent has not been received back served or otherwise.
6. Heard Sri G.Pavana Murhy, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. K.Rajitha, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents No.1 to 4 and have perused the materials placed on record.
7. As can be seen from the records, the applicant who is widow of deceased employee late D.Ranjit Kumar Yadav has received all the death/service benefits such as CGEGIS, leave salary etc. The 4th respondent has issued Pension Payment Order(PPO) dated 18.08.2021 commencing family pension w.e.f. 02.08.2020 to the applicant. The 4th respondent vide letter dated 24.08.2021 has granted payment of arrears of family pension to the applicant to the extent of Rs.4,78,699 for the period from 02.08.2020. The applicant is also declared to be entitled to take treatment at CGHS empanelled hospitals vide 3rd respondent's letter dated 03.08.2020. The applicant has received almost all the benefits except GPF amount. When the applicant verified with the respondents about 6 OA.No.704/2021 non-payment of GPF amount, it is informed that the said amount will be paid to only nominee declared by the late employee. It is seen from the records that the deceased employee before his marriage had nominated his mother (5th respondent) in the GPF form. After marriage, the deceased employee had updated his family/nominee particulars to enter in his service records. As contended by the applicant, as per Section 2(g) of the Employees Provident Fund Rules 1952, the 5th respondent (mother-in-law of the applicant) does not come under the definition of family of the deceased employee as she is not dependent on the deceased employee. Section 2(g) of EPF Rules 1952 reads as follows:
"family" means-- (i) in the case of a male member, his wife, his children, whether married or unmarried, his dependant parents and his deceased son's widow and children: Provided that if a member proves that his wife has ceased, under the personal law governing him or the customary law of the community to which the spouses belong, to be entitled to maintenance she shall no longer be deemed to be a part of the member's family for the purpose of this Scheme, unless the member subsequently intimates by express notice in writing to the Commissioner that she shall continue to be so regarded; and (ii) in the case of a female member, her husband, her children, whether married or unmarried, her dependant parents, her husband's dependant parents and her deceased son's widow and children:
Provided that if a member by notice in writing to the Commissioner expresses her desire to exclude her husband from the family, the husband and his dependent parents shall no longer be deemed to be a part of the member's family for the purpose of this Scheme, unless the member subsequently cancels in writing any such notice.
In the present case, the deceased employee after marriage had upgraded his family particulars in Form-3 as per Central Civil Service Pension Rules 54(12) on 28.04.2017 wherein he added his wife (applicant) and his two minor children as dependent family members and as such, as contended by the applicant, the parents of the deceased employee who are not dependent will not come under the definition of family. Therefore, the applicant and two minor children are 7 OA.No.704/2021 entitled for all the benefits including GPF of the deceased employee, being legal heirs/dependents on the deceased employee. Hence, there is a merit in the contention of the applicant that she is only entitled to get GPF amount as she is solely dependent on the deceased employee. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to release the GPF amount to the applicant and his two minor children within a period of one(1) month from the date of receipt of this order.
8. With the above observation, the OA is allowed. No order as to costs.
(SHALINI MISRA) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER /ps/