Tatigari Nirmala vs Smt. C Swarajya Bharathi
2021 Latest Caselaw 4903 AP

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                &
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY


                            W.A.No.751 of 2021

                         (Through physical mode)


Smt. Tatigari Nirmala W/o Murahari
Aged 58 years, Occ: Housewife, Korlakunta, Tirupati
Chittoor District
                                                                   ...Appellant

                                    Versus

Smt. C.Swarajya Bharathi, Bairagipatteda, Chittoor District
And others
                                                                ... Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant : Ms.Kalla Tulasi Durgamba

Counsel for the respondent No.1 : Mr.P.V.Venkata Ravi Sankar

Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5 : Dr.P.B.Reddy G.P for Services II

ORAL JUDGMENT

Dt: 30.11.2021

(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Heard learned counsel for the appellant on admission.

2. The writ appeal is preferred against the order dated 11.11.2020,

passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.21151 of 2020.

3. The aforesaid writ petition was preferred by the widow (1st wife) of

deceased employee, namely, T.Murahari, seeking consideration of her

prayer for sanction of family pension. The writ petition has been disposed

of by the impugned order, dated 11.11.2020, directing the 2nd respondent

to consider the writ petitioner's representation, dated 25.08.2020, in

accordance with law and settle her family pension, within four (4) weeks

from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that

the appellant herein, namely, Tatigari Nirmala, is entitled to family

pension and not C.Swarajya Bharathi, the petitioner in W.P.No.21151 of

2020.

5. Since there is no adjudication by the learned Single Judge on merits

of the matter as to the entitlement, we dispose of the writ appeal

directing the 2nd respondent to first consider and decide the rival claims

of the present appellant and the writ petitioner in W.P.No.21151 of 2020

about their entitlement to receive family pension after the death of

deceased employee, T.Murahari, and thereafter to release the family

pension in favour of the individual entitled. No costs. Pending

miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J

RAR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE

& HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

W.A No.751 of 2021

(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Dt: 30.11.2021

RAR