Madras High Court
The Chennai District Collector vs T.V.S.Jaya Perumal (Died) on 6 October, 2023
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.10.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.No.2445 of 2019 and
C.M.P.Nos.16044 & 15940 of 2019
1.The Chennai District Collector,
Singaravelar Malligai,
No.32, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai – 1.
2.The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District.
3.The Tahsildar,
Saidapet Taluk. ... Appellants
Vs.
1.T.V.S.Jaya Perumal (Died)
2.P.Natheesbabu
[R2 substituted as LR of the
deceased 1st respondent vide order
dated 15.09.2023 made in CMP.No.8104/2022]
... Respondents
Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, praying
to set aside the order dated 28.08.2017 made in W.P.No.28093 of 2004.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/12
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
For Appellants : Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondents : M/s.N.Gayathri for R2
: R1- Died
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)
This appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ
Court dated 28.08.2017 made in W.P.No.28093 of 2004.
2. It is yet another unfortunate case this Court has seen where one
T.S.Perumal was working as the Village Assistant at the office of the
Tahsildar, Mambalam-Guindy and during his service he died in harness
on 10.06.1987.
3. After his sudden death, the family has been under penurious
circumstances, therefore the only source of income for the family is
depending upon the family pension, for which the petitioner - T.V.S.Jaya
Perumal, wife of the deceased employee had requested for sanctioning
family pension.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
4. In this context, the Sub Collector, Saidapet vide his
communication dated 08.12.1987 had directed the Tahsildar, Guindy-
Mambalam, Chennai to consider the request of the petitioner and to do
the needful. The relevant portion of the letter dated 08.12.1987 of the
Sub Collector, Saidapet reads thus:
“ghh;itapy; fhQqk; fojj;Jld; tug;bgw;w
jpUkjp/o/v!;/ b$ah bgUkhs; vd;gthpd; kD
,izf;fg;gl;Ls;sd/ mtuJ fzth; fpz;o khk;gyk;
tl;lk;. ntsr;nrhp fpuhkj;jpy; jiyahhpahf gzpg[hpe;J
10/06/87y; ,we;jjhf bjhptpj;Js;shh;/ mtUf;F
nruntz;oa bjhiffs; mspf;fg;gl;ldth vd;gJ Fwpj;J
jf;f eltof;if vLj;J kDjhuUf;F bjhptpf;f
tl;lhl;rpah; nfl;Lf; bfhs;sg;gLfpwhh;/”
5. But nothing was moved forward, therefore the petitioner had
approached the District Collector i.e., the 1st appellant herein who had
sent communication to the Tahsildar, Saidapet, the 3rd appellant herein on
03.04.1989 with the following content:
“brd;id khtl;l tUtha; myfpidr; nrh;e;j
jpU/o/v!;/bgUkhs; vd;fpd;w jiyahhp 10/6/87 md;W
fhykhdhh;/ vdnt md;dhhpd; FLk;gj;jhUf;F FLk;g
Xa;t{jpak; tH';f jf;f Kd;bkhHpt[fis mDg;g[khW
nfl;Lf; bfhs;fpnwd;/
xk;- uh/Rg;ukzpak;.
khtl;lhl;rpaUf;fhf.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
6. Despite these proceedings which were issued by the Collector as
well as the Sub Collector, nothing has been moved in forward direction
at the office of the Tahildar concerned. Therefore, having no other option
the petitioner had moved this Court by filing the said writ petition in
W.P.No.28093 of 2004 seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the
respondents who are the appellants herein to pay the terminal benefits
and family pension due to the late T.S.Perumal.
7. The said writ petition was heard and the learned Judge has
allowed the same by order dated 28.08.2017 which is impugned herein.
8. Heard Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan, learned Additional
Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and Ms.N.Gayathri,
learned counsel for the respondent.
9. In fact, the wife of the deceased employee filed the writ petition
in the year 2004, that writ petition came to be decided only on
28.08.2017. This has been recorded by the learned Judge in para 4 of the
writ order, which reads thus:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
“4.At the time of filing the writ petition, the petitioner
was aged about 55 years and she has approached this Court
for settlement of the terminal benefits of her husband. Even
after such a long time from her husband's death on
10.06.1987, the petitioner is not able to get a single paise
from the Government. Now she would have reached the age
of seventy years. There is no dispute regarding the death of
the petitioner's husband while he was in service.”
10. In the order impugned, the learned Judge has considered the
aforestated communication of the Sub Collector as well as the District
Collector dated 08.12.1987 and 03.04.1989 respectively and also rejected
the contention raised on behalf of the appellants who were the
respondents before the Writ Court quoting G.O.(Ms)No.625 Revenue
Department dated 06.07.1975 and after giving all these reasons, the said
writ petition was allowed through the impugned order by the Writ Court.
11. However, the appellant Department not accepted the decision
of the Writ Court, therefore the present intra Court appeal has been
directed.
12. During the pendency of this appeal, the respondent who is the
wife of the deceased employee also died, therefore their son
P.Natheesbabu has been impleaded as the 2nd respondent in this appeal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
who himself is 60 years old now and is already suffered with some
ailment.
13. This is the pathetic situation of the family. The deceased
employee was working in the lowest ebb of the hierarchy i.e., Village
Assistant erstwhile called as “Thalaiyari”. May be a small post but the
job entrusted to such Village Assistant is very pertinent and important in
certain contingencies.
14. Whether it is night or day, rainy or hot sun, calamity or in
normal circumstances, the services of such Village Assistants are pressed
into service or drawn by the higher officials of the Revenue Department.
15. After having extracted such a work from a Village Assistant
for several years and if such a Village Servant died during service in
harness, whether he is entitled to get death-cum-retirement benefits and
whether the spouse of the deceased employee would be entitled to get the
family pension benefits is not a matter to be adjudicated into further as a
litigious area.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
16. In fact, this position is fortified by the said two
communications of the higher officials of the Revenue Department. The
first one is from the Sub Collector, Saidapet dated 08.12.1987 and the
second one is from the Collector of the District i.e. Collector, Chennai
dated 03.04.1989.
17. If at all there is some confusion with regard to by which Office
his pension papers or family pension of the deceased employee has to be
cleared i.e., either by the Tahsildar office located in Chennai District or
in Kancheepuram District that is the internal matter to be sorted out by
the officials of the Revenue Department, for which a poor employee like
the deceased Perumal cannot be taken into task.
18. This in fact has been pointed out by the learned Judge in para 9
of the order impugned stating that, the Court is not able to understand as
to why the poor lady was made to run from pillar to post for the past
several years without paying any benefits.
19. The employee died in 1987, we are in 2023, 36 long years have
gone.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
20. For these 36 long years, a poor widow of a lower grade
Government servant has been struggling throughout the rest of her life to
get the lawful benefits from the Government, but she failed, despite the
Court ordered it in the year 2017, i.e., after 13 years of the litigation
instituted in this Court.
21. Even after the order passed by the Writ Court in the year 2017,
the appellant Department not satisfied and not accepted the same and
preferred this intra Court appeal during which period the poor lady also
died without even seeing the light of the death-cum-retirement and
family pension benefits of the deceased employee for the service
rendered by her husband to the Revenue Department of the State of
Tamil Nadu for several years.
22. Now the son of the deceased employee and the deceased writ
petitioner has been impleaded as one of the respondent in the present
appeal, who has already reached 60 years, which has been informed to
this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
23. This kind of situation can never be placed against any person
that too on the family members of the deceased employee of the State
Government.
24. The abdication of duty and shirking the responsibility now
become a routine affair for the people who are sitting in a position to take
a decision quickly to act upon in the interest of public and public good.
25. This is one of the case where because of the attitude on the part
of the officials concerned, a poor Government employee's family had
been facing the struggle for 36 long years.
26. The quoting of a Government Order i.e., G.O.Ms.No.625 has
already been clarified by the learned Judge in the order impugned,
despite that the intention seems to be, of the appellant Department, is to
see that even a meagre amount by way of family pension shall not go to
the hands of the widow of a lower grade Government servant. This kind
of attitude instead of being termed as unlawful, arbitrary etc., this Court
in one word can explain the same as 'Inhuman'. For such an act on whom
the responsibility can be fixed is a question, as by the time in these last
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
36 years, there might have been many number of persons could have
occupied the position as Collector, Sub-Collector, D.R.O., R.D.O.,
Tahsildar etc.
27. However, the fact remains that, the family did not see the fruits
in these long 36 years.
28. Therefore we feel that, this case can be taken as a model case
by the Government and in order to streamline these kind of issues to
settle the pension or family pension, a mechanism can be arrived at of
course in tune with either under the existing law or if need arises by
making amendment of the existing law.
29. In this context, the existing law pertaining to the service
conditions of the Government Servant may not be sufficient or adequate
to have such an effective mechanism, therefore the Government may
think of making amendment to the existing law and have an effective
mechanism to see that, the retirement cum death benefits as well as the
pensionary benefits and also the family pension benefits of a deceased
Government employee, whatever be the entitlement accordingly, is paid
and continued to be paid, within a maximum period of six months. To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
achieve this goal we believe and expect that the State Government will
come forward with a permanent solution by having a Scheme to
streamline the System.
30. With the above observations, we are inclined to dismiss this
appeal, of course with a cost of Rs.10,000/-, but if we impose such a cost,
on that ground itself the appellant Department may further delay the
issue by preferring further appeals unwarrantedly using the money from
the Government exchequer, therefore we refrain ourselves from imposing
such cost and thereby this appeal is dismissed without costs. As a sequel,
the benefits as directed by the learned Judge through the impugned order
shall be calculated and be paid with arrears to the present 2nd respondent
who is the son of the deceased employee as well as the widow of the
employee within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions
are also dismissed.
[R.S.K., J.] [C.K., J.]
06.10.2023
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
Note : Issue order copy on 06.10.2023
Sgl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
R. SURESH KUMAR, J.
and
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
Sgl
W.A.No.2445 of 2019
06.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
