IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. No. 4168 of 2009. Decided on 15.07.2010. Chander Kanta. ….. Petitioner. -Versus- Employees Provident Fund Organization and others. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner. : Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 and 2. : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral): Petitioner claims pension under the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995. She retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31st October, 2002. When the petitioner applied for the pension under the scheme, it appears that the department has taken a stand that unless a joint photograph of her and spouse is provided, she could not be granted pension being married lady. Thus aggrieved, this writ petition has been filed. 2 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Solicitor General of India. The submission of the petitioner that after 1970, her husband has left her alone and he is settled in U.S.A. and that there is no contact, and that for all intents and purposes there is no subsisting marriage, that will not give the status of a divorcee to the petitioner. But, the question is as to what is the relevance of joint photograph of spouse in case the spouse is not interested in getting any benefit under the scheme and since the petitioner is claiming the pension only in respect of her membership in the scheme. The question whether the spouse will be entitled to pension is to be decided when the spouse stakes a claim. As of now, there is no such case for the department. In that view of the matter, we do not think it necessary to go into the contentions raised by the petitioner or deal with the validity of the condition prescribed in the form. Those contentions are left open. 3. We do not find any justifiable reasons for insisting upon the joint photograph of the petitioner and her spouse except when the spouse stakes any claim under the scheme. In the light of the facts as stated by the petitioner, we do not find any possibility that the spouse may stake any claim under the scheme. Otherwise also, that question arises only when the spouse stakes a claim and comes forward for benefit under the scheme. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to disburse the eligible benefit to the petitioner 3 under the scheme, ignoring the objections that there is no photograph with the spouse. The needful shall be done within a period of two months from date of production of the certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti, on usual terms. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 15th July, 2010 (bhupender/awasthi)