Disposed

Alanka Varalaxmi and another v. the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corp and 3 Others

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Dec 2019WP/1084/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition regarding non-payment of death benefits and pending compassionate appointment. Noting the lack of a joint application from the claimants as directed in a previous judgment, the court reiterated the requirement to submit such an application for disposal.

What did the court decide?

Directing the petitioners and 4th respondent to submit a joint application for consideration, with a direction to respondents to dispose of it expeditiously if filed.

Alanka Varalaxmi and another Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

KVL, J WP No.1084 of 2019

¶3

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶4

Writ Petition No.1084 of 2019

¶5

ORDER:

¶6

This writ petition is filed “to declare the inaction of the official respondents 1 to 3 in releasing the death benefits namely, government provident fund, gratuity, encashment of earned leave and insurance amount to the 1^st petitioner and in considering the representation dated 05.12.2018 of the 2^nd petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.”

¶7

Case of the petitioners is that, 1^st petitioner is the wife and the 2^nd petitioner is the daughter of the deceased A.Trimurthulu, who worked as Foreman Grade-II in Muchkund Hydro Electric (Joint) Scheme, Onukudelli under the control of respondents 1 to 3 and he died on 22.03.2016 while he was in service; the 1^st petitioner’s husband filed OP No.175 of 1997 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court, Anakapalie under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking divorce against the 1^st petitioner; she also filed OP No.2 of 2004 against her husband seeking restitution of conjugal rights; by way of common order dated 09.09.2005, OP No.175 of 1997 filed by the husband of the 1^st petitioner was dismissed and OP No.2 of 2004 filed by the 1^st petitioner was allowed; after the death of the 1^st petitioner’s husband, the 4^th respondent claimed that 1^st petitioner’s husband married her; the 4^th respondent filed WP No.32216 of 2006 seeking a direction to the official respondents 1 to 3 herein to grant family pension to her; petitioners herein were impleaded as respondents 4 and 5 therein; there was a compromise between the petitioners and the 4^th respondent and as per the said compromise, the 4^th respondent has to get pension, while the 2^nd petitioner herein has to get employment on compassionate grounds

¶8

¶9

KVL, J WP No.1084 of 2019

¶10

and in those circumstances, the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2017, observing that ‘it is left open to the petitioner (the 4^th respondent herein) and respondents 4 and 5 (petitioners herein) to submit a joint application to respondents 2 and 3 for redressal of their grievances regarding payment of retirement benefits and providing compassionate appointment and directed the official respondents to receive application and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible’; pursuant to the said order, petitioners approached the 4^th respondent for submitting joint application, but she did not come forward for filing of the same; the 2^nd petitioner sent representation dated 05.12.2018 to respondents 1 to 3 requesting them to provide compassionate appointment to her and the said representation is still pending; petitioners have no objection if the 4^th respondent is granted family pension, but the official respondents are not releasing the pensionary benefits or considering the representation of the petitioners. Hence, the writ petition.

¶11

Counter-affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondent stating inter-alia that the representation filed by the 2^nd petitioner is not accompanied with relevant documents for consideration of appointment on compassionate grounds and that the same is blatant violation of the directions of this Court in WP No.32216 of 2016 and that the vital documents i.e., legal heir certificate, death certificate, certificate from Revenue Department have to be submitted for considering the compassionate appointment and that the petitioners and the 4^th respondent have not submitted joint petition before the APGENCO.

¶12

Counter-affidavit has been filed by the 4^th respondent stating inter-alia that as per the compromise between the petitioners and herself, she is entitled for family pension and she has no objection for

¶13

¶14

KVL, J WP No.1084 of 2019

¶15

providing appointment to the 2^nd petitioner herein on compassionate grounds.

¶16

As seen from the pleadings and the documents filed along with the writ petition, WP No.32216 of 2016 was disposed of directing the parties i.e., petitioners and the unofficial respondents therein, to submit a joint application to respondents 2 and 3 ventilating their grievance with regard to the compassionate appointment and for retirement benefits and if such an application is received by respondents 2 and 3, they were directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law. The counter-affidavit filed by respondents 2 and 3 shows that no such joint application is filed by the petitioners and the 4^th respondent.

¶17

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, as the previous writ petition i.e., WP No.32216 of 2016 was already disposed of on 07.11.2017 directing the petitioners and the 4^th respondent herein to submit their joint application, petitioners and the 4^th respondent herein are directed to submit a joint application to respondents 2 and 3 and if such an application is filed, respondents 2 and 3 are directed to dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible.

¶18

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶19

__________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J

¶20

Date: 16.12.2019 Note: Furnish CC in one week. (BO) BSS

¶21

¶22

KVL, J WP No.1084 of 2019

¶23

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶24

Writ Petition No.1084 of 2019

¶25

¶26

Date: 16.12.2019

¶27

BSS

Alanka Varalaxmi and another v. the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corp and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alanka Varalaxmi and another v. the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corp and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K Padmavathi Vs Collector and District

G RoOpa Devi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M.Venkata Naga Madhavi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P. Simhachalam, Vs The Project Director

Muthyala Simhachalam, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Rama Rao, Vs The Director