EPF Benefits To The Wife Of Deceased - Employees Provident Funds And Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952

EPF BENEFITS TO THE WIFE OF DECEASED - EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUNDS AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT, 1952 - (The very purpose of legislation is to provide welfare to the employees. If that welfare is taken away on account of technicalities, the Court shoul
The petitioners husband Bodheswaran was in the service of Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. The establishment was covered by the provisions of EPF Act. While in service Bodheswaran had shown the name of his wife Rajlaxmi as his nominee. Later he took divorce and married to the petitioner on 30.04.2006.
Bodheswaran took Voluntary retirement on 17.01.2005. After his retirement from service he made a request to the EPF authorities to change the nominee. He wanted the petitioner to be his new nominee in place of his divorced wife Rajlaxmi. However, his request was rejected for the reason that by the time he married the petitioner, he was not a member of the EPF.
The petitioner therefore, filed the present petition before the High Court for appropriate relief. The petition was opposed by the respondent on the ground that merely because the deceased was in receipt of pension, he could not change nomination on his retirement from service. It appears that Bodheswaran died after he took voluntary retirement.The High Court observed that this is not an issue which would come within the ambit of EPF Act.
This is something which the said Act never contemplated. Consequent upon divorce, the relation of late Bodheswaran with his first wife Rajlaxmi came to an end. She cannot therefore be permitted to continue as nominee. It was further observed that such a situation certainly warrants a change. In the absence of any law the general principle relating to succession will have to be followed in a matter like this.
The High Court remarked that law is an aid to render justice. Law and Justice always supplement each other. The very purpose of legislation is to provide welfare to the employees.
If that welfare is taken away on account of technicalities, the Court should come to the aid of the aggrieved to render justice. In view of this position, the High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order and directed the respondent to enter the name of the petitioner in place of the divorced wife Rajlaxmi as the nominee of late Bodheswaran.
-Rani Bodheswaran, w/o Late Sri Bodheswaran, Malappuram v. Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension), Kochi & Others, (H.C.Ker.) 2017
THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT, 1952

No comments:

Post a Comment