Madras High Court
The Director Of Medical And Rural vs M.Hariharakrishnan on 23 July, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1477 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1477 of 2021
and
C.M.P(MD).No.6077 of 2021
1. The Director of Medical and Rural
Health Services,
Chennai - 600 006.
2. The Joint Director of Health Services,
Ramanathapuram District,
Ramanathapuram.
3. The Hospital Superintendent,
Government Head Quarters Hospital,
Ramanathapuram. ... Appellants/Respondents
Vs.
M.Hariharakrishnan ... Respondent/Petitioner
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order of
this Court made in W.P.(MD) No.19205 of 2019, dated 15.11.2019.
For Appellants : Mr.A.K.Manikkam
Standing Counsel for Government
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/4
W.A.(MD)No.1477 of 2021
For Respondent : Mr.S.Govindan
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
We have heard Mr.A.K.Manikkam, learned Government Counsel
appearing for the appellants and Mr.S.Govindan, learned counsel appearing for
the respondent.
2. This writ appeal has been filed by the Director of Medical and
Rural Health Service and two others, questioning the correctness of the order
dated 15.11.2019 in W.P(MD)No.19205 of 2019. The said writ petition was
filed by the respondent herein to quash the order passed by the third appellant
dated 23.05.2019 and to sanction the family benefit fund of Rupees Three
Lakhs, due to the demise of the respondent's wife, by taking note of
G.O.Ms.No.57, Finance Department, dated 22.02.2016.
3. The learned Single Bench after taking into consideration the said
Government order in G.O.Ms.No.57, allowed the writ petition. Before us, the
appellants are not able to establish that G.O.Ms.No.57 is not applicable to the
case of the respondent's wife. However, the objection appears to be that under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1477 of 2021
the scheme, the employee also has to make a contribution which was initially
Rs.30 per month and subsequently, it has been increased to Rs.60 per month and
the payment being a sum of Rupees Three Lakhs, which came into effect from
01.02.2016. Therefore, for the respondent to be entitled to the family pension
scheme amount, contribution of the employee is required to be deducted.
Without deducting the same, the Writ Court could not have directed the
payment of Rupees Three Lakhs under the Family Benefit Fund Scheme.
4. Therefore, we allow the writ appeal in part and modify the order
and direction issued in the writ petition by directing the appellants to deduct the
employee's contribution calculated at the rate of Rs.60 per month and after
deducting the same, the balance amount shall be paid to the respondent.
5. This direction be complied with within a period of two months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Writ Appeal stands Partly
Allowed with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index :Yes/No (T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
Internet :Yes/No 23.07.2021
pkn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1477 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy
of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
W.A.(MD)No.1477 of 2021
23.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
