Family wins pension battle against HPSEDC in HP high court
Shimla, Oct 20
The High Court of Himachal Pradesh ruled in favour of the family of a deceased employee, holding the H.P. State Electronic Development Corporation responsible for the delay in processing the family pension claim. In a judgment by Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and the Justice Bipin Chander Negi on 18th October, 2023, involved the Managing Director of H.P. State Electronic Development Corporation as the appellant and Devbanti Negi & others as the respondents.
The case pertains to the approval and application of the Himachal Pradesh Corporate Sector Employees (Pension, Family Pension, Commutation of Pension and Gratuity) Scheme, 1999, and the dispute over the eligibility for family pension benefits.
During the course of the hearing, one of the reasons for non-grant of family pension to the deceased husband of writ petitioner No.1/respondent No.1 was that he had never opted under the scheme. It was argued by learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/appellant Corporation that since the Regulations governing the service condition had not been amended in consonance with the scheme, therefore, no family pension could be paid to employees/beneficiates under the scheme. It was further argued that amendment made to the service condition in the year, 2019 were of no relevance as by then, the scheme in question had been withdrawn on 2.12.2004.
However, the judgment highlights that the deceased employee’s failure to exercise the option under the scheme was not a valid reason to deny family pension benefits. The Court also found that the delay in processing the family pension claim was due to the Corporation’s inaction, and was held responsible for the delay.
The verdict discussed the relevance of the scheme’s applicability, the minutes of board meetings, and the amendment of service regulations, emphasizing that the Corporation had approved and adopted the scheme. The Court ordered the Corporation to pay the due family pension along with interest for the delayed payment. Also, the court directed the Corporation to pay costs to the petitioners.
The judgment also instructed the recovery of the interest and costs from the responsible officials within the Corporation.
