Madras High Court
Revathi vs The Managing Director on 13 October, 2022
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
and
WMP. No. 7296 of 2018
Revathi
... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport
Corporation (Salem) Ltd.,
102/12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem.
2. The Branch Manager,
Tamilnadu State Transport,
Corporation (Salem) Ltd.,
Rasipuram Branch,
Namakkal District.
3. The Administrator,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Thiruvallurvar House,
Pallavan Salai,
Chennai – 600 002.
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent vide his office
proceedings Na.Ka.No. 3536-1/Pension-1/Tha.Aa.Po.Ka. (Salem)/2017 dated
2.5.2017 and quash the same and direct the respondents to pay Family
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
pension to the petitioner for the death of her husband namely A.P.
Kandasamy i.e on 23.08.2015 while in service from the date of his death and
other monetary benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr. M. Karthik
for Mr. I.C. Vasudevan
For Respondents : Mr. R. Babu
for R1 and R2
Mr. C.S.K. Sathish
for R3
ORDER
The rejection order dated 02.05.2017, rejecting the claim of the writ
petitioner for grant of family pension, is under challenge in the present writ
petition.
2. The disputes between the parties are that the husband of the writ
petitioner late Kandasamy was employed as Driver and on account an
allegation of unauthorised absence, he was terminated from service.
Thereafter, based on the negotiations between the parties, the husband of the
writ petitioner was reinstated on 14.03.2001 on temporary basis. However,
the services of the husband of the writ petitioner was regularised with effect
from 01.09.2005, after the cut of date 01.04.2003, for granting of pension
under the pension regulations.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
3. In view of the fact that the services of the husband of the writ
petitioner was regularised after the cut of date, 01.04.2003, the respondents
rejected the case of the petitioner for grant of family pension.
4. The interpretation of the pension regulations applicable to the
transport employees were elaborately considered by this Court in W.P.No.
10677 of 2015 and a judgment was delivered on 12.09.2022. Accordingly,
the regular employees whose services were regularised prior to 01.04.2003
alone are entitled for the benefit of pension regulation and more so, in the
present case, the husband of the writ petitioner was brought under the regular
employment only on 01.09.2005. Thus, this Court do not find any infirmity in
respect of the order passed by the respondents. Therefore, the writ petition
stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition
is closed.
13.10.2022
mrn
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-Speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
To
1. The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport
Corporation (Salem) Ltd.,
102/12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem.
2. The Branch Manager,
Tamilnadu State Transport,
Corporation (Salem) Ltd.,
Rasipuram Branch,
Namakkal District.
3. The Administrator,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Thiruvallurvar House,
Pallavan Salai,
Chennai – 600 002.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
mrn
W.P.No. 5923 of 2018
and
WMP. No. 7296 of 2018
13.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
