Madras High Court
S.Mari vs The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep on 9 June, 2023
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 09.06.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
S.Mari
... Petitioner
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.,
By, Secretary to Government, Public
(Political Pension-2) Department,
Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2. The District Collector,
Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District..
3. The Tahsildar,
Virudhunagar Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for
the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second
respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.J3/26347/2021, dated 02.02.2023
and quash the same and consequently directing the Respondents to
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
sanction the Maruthupandiar Brothers Descendants Pension to the
petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Mahendran
For Respondents : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia,
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a
Certiorarified Mandamus seeking interference with the order of the
second respondent/District Collector, Virudhunagar District, in his
proceedings in Na.Ka.J3/26347/2021, dated 02.02.2023 and
consequently, to direct the said respondent to sanction pension by
recognizing the petitioner as one of the descendants / legal heir of
Maruthupandiyar Brothers.
2. Heard Mr.R.Mahendran, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia, learned Special Government Pleader for
the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
3. The petitioner herein, Mari, Son of Subbaiya had given a
representation to the authorities seeking pension as granted by the
Government in G.O.Ms.No.1143 Public (Political A) Department, dated
19.07.1982, wherein, the Government had recognized that the
descendants of Maruthupandiyar Brothers are entitled for pension.
4. It is stated by the petitioner herein that his brother
S.Muniyandi, had also sent a representation seeking pension and that
was refused by the Government and questioning that, he had filed W.P.
(MD) No.2790 of 2018 and by an order, dated 19.03.2021, the said Writ
Petition had been allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance
on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.355 of 2021
dated 17.02.2021, The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Secretary to
Government, Public (Political Pension -2) Department, Secretariat,
Chennai and others Vs. V.Kanaga and others. That Writ Appeal had
been filed questioning an order of the learned Single Judge who had
granted and recognized that the respondents in the Writ Appeal were
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
entitled for pension. The appeal was filed questioning the status of the
respondents therein as they were female descendants and not male
descendants. The Writ Appeal was disposed of, by the Division Bench
by the aforementioned order, dated 17.02.2021.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that when the
brother of the petitioner had been recognized by this Court and pension
has been granted, there is no justification in denying the representation
given by the petitioner herein seeking similar status, since his father has
died and as legal heir of his father, he is entitled to claim pension and be
recognised as legal heir of Maruthupandiyar Brothers.
7. The learned Special Government Pleader, however,
placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No.1143 dated 19.07.1982, wherein, the
Government after examining various representations given, had taken a
decision to grant Political Pension to the legal heirs of the descendants of
Maruthupandiyar Brothers. In the said Government Order, the
descendants and their addresses had also been given as an annexure. It
has been stated by the learned Special Government Pleader that one
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
member in every family would be duly recognized for grant of pension
and it is stated that in the family of the petitioner herein, his brother
S.Muniyandi had been recognized and therefore, the petitioner is
disentitled from claiming pension.
8. I have given my careful consideration to the arguments
advanced and also perused the materials submitted.
9. A perusal of the impugned order shows that there is no
reference to the orders of the Writ Appeal or the Writ Petition. The issue
of "members of the family" has to be examined since each brother
constitutes a separate family by himself. There cannot be overlapping of
the two families of two brothers. A narrow interpretation cannot be given
to that particular word ‘family’. In G.O.Ms.No.1143 dated 19.07.1982,
the word used is "descendant" of Maruthupandiyar Brothers. Every
individual who is born as a descendant can claim that status. There is no
reference to all these aspects in the impugned order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
10. The impugned order had restricted itself to the 202
members as given in the annexure to the aforementioned Government
Order. There is also no reference as pointed out earlier to the reasoning
of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.2790 of 2018 or to the
reasonings of the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.355 of 2021. The fact
is that the petitioner is the brother of Muniyandi. The fact is that the
petitioner herein is also a legal heir. Actually, he cannot be denied being
recognized as a descendant of Maruthupandiyar Brothers. It is also seen
that in the Writ Appeal, the respondents therein had been so recognized
even though they were female descendants. All three of the respondents
therein belonged to the same family and each one of them had been
independently granted pension.
11. The impugned order, therefore, cannot withstand the
scrutiny of this Court and is, therefore, set aside. The matter is remitted
back to the third respondent and the petitioner herein may submit the
copies of the orders of the Writ Appeal and the Writ Petition and the
second respondent is directed to examine the status of the petitioner
herein as legal heir of his father Subbaiya, who is the brother of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
S.Muniyandi, who had been recognized by the order of the learned
Single Judge in the aforementioned Writ Petition and had been granted
pension.
12. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is
remitted back for fresh consideration by the second respondent in the
light of the judicial pronouncements. The second respondent may also
keep in mind the fact that the word used in the Government Order is only
"descendant" and not family. The petitioner herein as legal heir of a
male descendant, certainly has every right to claim pension. The second
respondent, on receipt of the records, may endeavour to dispose of the
same after giving opportunity to the petitioner herein and after
examining the records on or before 31.10.2023.
13. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
09.06.2023
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
NCC : Yes / No
PNM
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu
Public (Political Pension-2) Department,
Secretariat,
Fort St. George,
Chennai - 9.
2.The District Collector
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Thasildar
Thiruchuli Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
PNM
ORDER IN
W.P(MD)No.13572 of 2023
09.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
