IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2009 / 29TH ASWINA 1931 OP.No. 7168 of 1999(C) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- T.P. JACOB, HOUSE NO.M 131, CHANGAPUZHA NAGAR P.O., COCHIN-682 033. BY ADV. MR.K.N.RAVEENDRAN MR.C.S.MANU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., HEAD OFFICE, NO.24 WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-6000014, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL JUNCTION, ALUVA-683 101. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SC. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 7168/1999-C APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PAY BILL DATED 31/07/1990 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30/10/1989. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03/04/1997 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE ASST. MANAGER UNDER THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 17/11/89 BEARING NO.100900/PER/160/89. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF THE PROVIDENT FUND. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a): COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.CNRO/PER/MKTG/48/88 DATED 15/07/1988 ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER, UN ITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. TO THE PETITIONER'S SON. EXT.R2(b): COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CNRO/MKTG/688/2002 DATED 25/09/2002 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER (MARKETING) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R2(c): COPY OF THE LETTER NO.100900/PER/198/89 DATED 20/02/1990 ISSUED BY THE E.P. GOPINATHAN, ASSISTANT MANAGER TO THE REGIONAL OFFICE COCHIN, SETTLEMENT OF P.F. AND GRATUITY OF LATE SHRI T.J. ROY, DEVELOPMENT OFFICER. EXT.R2(d): COPY OF THE LETTER NO.100900/PEN/26/90-91 DATED 18/06/1990 ISSUED BY THE T.L. JAGANATHAN, SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER TO THE REGIONAL OFFICE, COCHIN, SETTLEMENT OF P.F. AND GRATUITY OF SHRI T.J. ROY. EXT.R2(e): COPY OF THE LETTER NO.100900/PER/27/90-91 DATED 18/06/1990 ISSUED BY THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER TO THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- O.P. NO.7168 OF 1999 (C) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's only son Sri.T.J. Roy, joined service of the first respondent as Development Officer on 18.7.1988. He met with a motor cycle accident on 31.8.1989 at Aluva while on official tour and died on the same day. In this Original Petition the prayers made are to quash Ext.P3 where the claim of the petitioner for family pension has been rejected by the respondents and to direct the respondents to pay provident fund amount which stood to the credit of the deceased with interest. In so far as the prayer for payment of provident fund dues is concerned, according to the counsel for the respondent, the amounts have been fully paid and that receipt dated 25.6.2009 has been issued by the petitioner. Therefore that prayer need not be dealt with. 2. In so far as the prayer for family pension is concerned, the contentions raised by the respondents are two fold. One is that the Family Pension Scheme 1971was withdrawn with effect from 1.8.1988. If so, on the date of death, there was no Family Pension Scheme in force and in which event the claim cannot be accepted. That apart, Family Pension Scheme O.P.NO.7168/99 :2 : defines `family' in clause 2(b) thereof which reads as under. `Family' means:- (i) wife in the case of male member of the Family Pension Fund. (ii) husband in the case of a female member of the Family Pension Fund; and (iii) minor sons and unmarried daughters of a member of the Family Pension Fund.” 3. This definition shows that wife, husband, minor sons and unmarried daughters alone are included in the definition of family and this does not include father of the deceased. On this ground as well, the claim raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted. Original petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/