Madras High Court
K.Nagabhooshanam vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 20 July, 2021
W.P.No.17773 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED: 20.07.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
W.P.No.17773 of 2017
K.Nagabhooshanam ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Transport Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Managing Director,
State Express Transport Corporation,
(Old Name Thiruvallur
Transport Corporation),
Pallavan Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
3.The Commissioner,
Employees Provident Fund,
Regional Office,
No.20, Royapettah High Road,
Chennai - 600 014. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to grant
Family Pension and for payment of arrears of Family Pension to the
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.17773 of 2017
petitioner from 16.01.2017, the day following the date of the death of the
petitioner's husband by following the judgments in W.A.No.1246 of 2009
dated 18.08.2010 and in W.P.No.33975 of 2005 dated 20.09.2011 and in
W.P.No.35674 of 2005 dated 20.09.2011 and in W.P.Nos.12840 to 12842
of 2016 dated 05.04.2016.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.S.Jagadeesan
For R1 : Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar
Government Counsel
For R2 : Mr.K.Kathiresan
For R3 : Mr.T.R.Sundaram
ORDER
By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for
final disposal.
2. The petitioner herein claims to be the wife of late
K.Kamalanathan, who was an employee of the 2nd respondent
Corporation. The petitioner herein claims arrears of family pension
owing to the death of her husband. The petitioner herein placed reliance
on G.O.Ms.No.387 Finance (Pension) Department, dated 10.12.2019 and
would submit that the first respondent herein is the proper authority to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.17773 of 2017
disburse the pension insofar the second respondent Corporation is
concerned.
3. The issue as to whether, the petitioner is entitled for family
pension owing to the death of her late husband, requires to be considered
by the respondents herein and this Court may not be justified in
adjudicating the petitioner's claim by stepping into the shoes of the
respondents. Nevertheless, if the petitioner is granted liberty to put forth
all his claims and place reliance on Government Orders or other High
Court orders, with a consequential direction to the first respondent to
consider such a claim, the ends of justice could be secured.
4. In the light of the above observations, the petitioner is granted
liberty to make a fresh representation to the first respondent herein
ventilating her grievances and on receipt of such a representation, the
first respondent shall consider the same, in the light of the
G.O.Ms.No.387, Finance (Pension) Department, dated 10.12.2019 and
pass necessary orders, within a period of 3 months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.17773 of 2017
M.S.RAMESH,J.
hvk
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
20.07.2021
Index:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
hvk
To
1.The Secretary,
Transport Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Managing Director,
State Express Transport Corporation,
(Old Name Thiruvallur
Transport Corporation),
Pallavan Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
3.The Commissioner,
Employees Provident Fund,
Regional Office,
No.20, Royapettah High Road,
Chennai - 600 014.
W.P.No.17773 of 2017
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
