JUDGMENT : K. Vinod Chandran, J. The appeal is filed by the differently abled daughter of a deceased employee who is covered under the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995. The employee, father of the petitioner, died when he was in service with M/s. Premier Tyres Limited, Kalamassery, an establishment covered under the Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 [for brevity “the Act”]. He was survived by his wife and only daughter, the petitioner. The mother was granted widow pension and the petitioner sanctioned 25% of the widow pension as children pension. The petitioner's mother re-married and hence she was subsequently dis-entitled to the widow pension granted to her. 2. The petitioner, through her mother, approached the authorities and this Court for orphan pension from the date of re-marriage of the mother. By Exhibit P1 judgment, this Court directed the mother to refund the pension drawn after her re-marriage and the respondent was directed to consider the disbursement of pension to the orphaned child. It is to be observed here that though the mother had been looking after the child; who also had represented the child in the proceedings, the description 'orphan' is only for the purpose of the Scheme of 1995. 3. The authorities granted orphan pension, which is 75% of the family pension. The contention raised before the learned Single Judge was that in addition to orphan pension, the disabled child is also entitled to children pension. The learned Single Judge extracted Clauses (3) and (4) of para 16 of the Scheme of 1995 and found against the petitioner, which is impugned in this appeal. 4. The learned Single Judge has elaborately considered the issue in paragraphs 7 to 9 of the impugned judgment, which we perfectly agree with. The Scheme as rightly found by the learned Single Judge; for monthly children pension is under Clause (3) and orphan pension is as per Clause (4) of para 16. Sub-clause (a) of para 16(3) entitles the surviving children of a deceased member to a monthly children pension in addition to the monthly widow/widower pension. Sub-clause (b) stipulates that such monthly children pension for each child shall be equal to 25% of the widow/widower pension, provided that for each child a minimum of Rs.150/-per month shall be paid. Sub-clause (c) restricts such payment of monthly children pension till the child attains 25 years of age. Sub-clause (b) stipulates that such monthly children pension for each child shall be equal to 25% of the widow/widower pension, provided that for each child a minimum of Rs.150/-per month shall be paid. Sub-clause (c) restricts such payment of monthly children pension till the child attains 25 years of age. Sub-clause (d) admits such monthly children pension to maximum of two children at a time and would run from the oldest to the youngest child in that order. Sub-clause (e) specifically speaks of the deceased member leaving behind a son or daughter who is permanently and totally disabled who would be entitled to payment of monthly children pension or orphan pension irrespective of age and number of children in the family in addition to the pension provided under sub-clause (d). 5. Sub-clause (a) of Clause (4) contemplates a situation when the deceased member is not survived by a spouse, but is survived by children falling within the definition of family and also a situation where the widow pension is not payable. In such circumstance, the children shall be entitled to a monthly orphan pension equal to 75% of the monthly widow pension; the minimum amount payable being not less than Rs.750/-per month. Sub-clause (b) of Clause (4) speaks of a situation where the death or re-marriage of the widow/widower after sanctioning of the family pension, which entitles the children to monthly orphan pension in lieu of the monthly children pension. 6. In the present case, the widow was granted family pension and the minor child granted children pension at the rate of 25% of the family pension. Hence, when there is a family/widow pension drawn by the deceased member's spouse, there is no special consideration of the disability of one of the children insofar as the pension amount is concerned. However, a disabled child would be entitled to the children pension de hors the fact that he/she, at a particular time, is not one of the two eldest children; who alone are otherwise eligible. The further benefit conferred on such a disabled child is that he/she would be permitted to draw pension without any restriction of age; for his/her entire life time. 7. The further benefit conferred on such a disabled child is that he/she would be permitted to draw pension without any restriction of age; for his/her entire life time. 7. Sub-clause(a) &(b) of para 16(4), provides that when there is a situation of there being no eligible spouse to get family pension, by reason inter alia of death or re-marriage of the widow/widower, then the children would be entitled to a monthly orphan pension from the date following the date of death or re-marriage, which would be equal to 75% of the monthly family/widow pension. 8. Hence, when the widow of a deceased member is alive and is not re-married, she is entitled to widow pension and any surviving children, at a time, upto two; the eldest two, if the number is more, would be entitled to 25% each of the widow pension. The children pension shall be continued only till the child attains the age of 25. If there are any disabled children, they shall be entitled, irrespective of age and number of children in the family, a children pension at the rate of 25% of the widow pension; subject to the entitlement being confined to two disabled children. This does not enable a orphaned disabled child, as per the terms of the Scheme, to both children pension or orphan pension. As rightly noticed by the learned Single Judge, para 16(3)(e) speaks of 'payment of monthly children pension or orphan pension'. Apposite also is reference to the words 'in lieu of the monthly children pension' in Clause 4(b). On the death or re-marriage of the widow/widower, the children would be entitled in lieu of the monthly children pension to a monthly orphan pension. In the case of a disabled child, such entitlement shall continue without restriction of age. In the light of the above interpretation, we do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. We reject the appeal, in limine.