Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a relief that she should be granted family pension upon the death of her husband, who was working as Watchman in the Food Corporation of India (FCI). The petitioner's husband was appointed as watchman in the FCI in the year 1978 on probation basis. He completed one year's probation period and was confirmed vide order dated 17.7.1979. Unfortunately, he passed away on 18.4.1980. The petitioner applied for grant of all the monetary benefits accruing upon death of her husband while in service. She was sent a letter Annex. 6 dated 26.8.1987 issued by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) that she was not entitled to family pension under the Rules because the service of the employee (her husband) was less than two years. The petitioner chose not to challenge the said communication and kept silent. She, however, kept on sending communications with the FCI claiming that she should be awarded family pension. Having failed to get a favourable answer, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition. Initially, the petitioner had impleaded 'Employment State Insurance Corporation' as respondent no. 3 to the writ petition though it had no business to do with the pension matter whatsoever. Accordingly, the relevant body i.e. Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) remained unrepresented and the writ petition was allowed on 10.2.2009. When the dues were not paid to the petitioner, she filed a contempt petition wherein the notice was served on EPFO. Appearance was put in on behalf of EPFO and it was submitted that the EPFO was not a party to the writ petition on which, it was given liberty to file a recalling application in the writ petition. Thereafter, EPFO applied for recalling of the aforesaid order as the same was passed without hearing them. The recalling application was accepted on 23.1.2013 and the matter was directed to be heard and decided afresh.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequent to the Employees Pension Scheme, 1971, a new scheme being Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 has been formulated by the Central Government wherein there is a saving clause which entitles the nominees of the deceased employee to claim family pension under the new scheme of 1995 even if the nomination was made even under the old scheme of 1971. He, therefore, submits that by the effect of repeal and saving clause, the petitioner is entitled to claim pension under the scheme of 1995 because the clause of completing two years' service has been done away in the new scheme of 1995. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition deserves to be accepted and the respondents be directed to grant family pension to the petitioner.;