Madras High Court
G.Ramalakshmi vs The Accountant General on 8 March, 2022
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.03.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.2008 of 2016
G.Ramalakshmi ... Petitioner
vs
1. The Accountant General, (Account & Entitlement)
261, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 018.
2. The Block Development Officer,
Panchayat Union, Pudur,
Tuticorin District – 628 905. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the pertaining to the
impugned order of the first respondent in Pen32/3/Pt.11340/75965, dated
06.11.2015 and quash the same as illegal and direct the first respondent to
provide pension to the petitioner in the light of the decree and judgment passed in
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
Original Suit in O.S.No.46/20, dated 18.09.2012.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam
For Respondents : Mr.P.Gunasekaran for R1
No appearance for R2
*****
ORDER
This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned order, dated 06.11.2015
passed by the first respondent, Accountant General.
2. The brief facts as stated in the affidavit is that the petitioner is the second
wife of the deceased Gnanamuthu. The first respondent has denied the
pensionary benefits on wrong interpretation of the judgment rendered in O.S. No.
46 / 2010 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vilathikulam. The respondents
have denied the benefits stating that the petitioner’s marriage with the deceased
Gnanamuthu cannot be accepted, since the second marriage took place while the
first wife of the deceased was alive.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
3. On perusal of the documents, it is seen that the first wife died on
07.08.1994 and the petitioner was married to the deceased Gnanamuthu on
19.05.1995. In the judgment rendered in O.S. No. 46 / 2010 on the file of the
District Munsif Court, Vilathikulam has also confirmed the said fact. Therefore
this Court is of the considered opinion that the 2 nd marriage have taken place after
the death of the first wife and not during the time of the first wife. Hence the
impugned order is set aside to the extent that it is stating that the 2nd wife is
married during the life time of the 1st wife and the 2nd wife is not eligible.
4. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner / 2nd
wife is entitled to pensionary benefits and other benefits of the deceased
Gnanamuthu. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to issue the pension to
the petitioner in the light of judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.46 of 2020,
dated 18.09.2012 on the file of District Munsif, Vilathikulam. The respondents
are directed to pay the pensionary benefits with 6% interest from 2017 onwards.
The second respondent is directed to re-submit the proposal along with this order
to the first respondent. Thereafter, the first respondent shall disburse it within a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
08.03.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
jbr
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
To
1. The Accountant General, (Account & Entitlement)
261, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 018.
2. The Block Development Officer,
Panchayat Union, Pudur,
Tuticorin District – 628 905.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
S.SRIMATHY, J
jbr
Order made in
W.P.(MD)No.2284 of 2016
08.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
