Maddikeri Roothamma Vs Maddikeri Suselamma

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to allow the Writ Appeal by setting aside the Interim Order dated 03.09.2025 passed by Learned Single Judge in I.A.No. 1 Of 2025 In W.P.No.22228 of 2025 and allow the Writ Appeal in the interest of justice and equity and to pass

¶10

Between:

¶11

MADDIKERI ROOTHAMMA, D/O LATE M.PEDDANNA, W/O REPALLI SALMAN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O H.NO.7-11, ABANDAN TANDA, KOTHAPALLI VILLAGE, NANDYAL MANDAL AND DISTRICT.

¶12

. MADDIKERI. LALU SWAMY, , S/O LATE M.PEDDANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O H.NO.24-167-B, HARIJANAWADA, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶13

MADDIKERI ARANGULA RAJESWARI, , D/O LATE M.PEDDANNA, W/O ARANGULA NAGA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O H.NO.24-143-2, HARIJANAWADA, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶14

MADDIKERI .JAWAHARLAL,, S/O LATE M.PEDDANNA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O H.NO.24-167-B, HARIJANAWADA, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶15

...APPELLANT(S)

¶16

AND

¶17

MADDIKERI SUSELAMMA, W/O. LATE M.PEDDANNA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O. H. N0.24-167/B, HARIJANWADA, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT, A.P

¶18

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TECHNICAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,

¶19

2

¶20

VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶21

THE PRINCIPAL, ESC GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC COLLAGE NANDYAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT.

¶22

THE COMMISSIONER OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, ANDHRA PRADESH MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. A.P.

¶23

THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES AND ACCOUNTS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P,

¶24

THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, A G OFFICE ANDHRA PRADESH, MG ROAD, GOVERNORPETA, VIJAYAWADA-520002, A.P.

¶25

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶26

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶27

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to dispense with filing of copy of interim order dated 03.09.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.22228 of 2025 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant leave to permit the appellant to file the appeal against interim order dated 03.09.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Learned Single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.22228 of 2025 on the file of Hon’ble High Court of A.P, in the interest of Justice and to pass IA NO: 3 OF 2025

¶29

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to Stay all the Further proceedings of I.A.No. 1 Of 2025 In W.P.No.22228 of 2025 on the dated:03.09.202 5 in the interest of justice and equity and to pass

¶30

Counsel for the Appellant(S):

¶31

1.T CHANDRA SEKAR

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶33

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶34

2.GP FOR SERVICES II

¶35

3.S V RUTHVIK

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

3

¶38

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶39

&

¶40

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA

¶41

WRIT APPEAL No.1100 of 2025

¶42

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Battu Devanand)

¶43

This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order dated 03.09.2025 in W.P.No.22228 of 2025 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court.

¶44

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 and learned Government Pleaders for services-I and II appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 6 and carefully perused the material available on record.

¶45

The facts leading to the filing of present writ appeal are as herein under:-

¶46

One Sri M.Peddanna was working as Watchman and his post was converted into a regular Last Grade Service post with effect from 01.04.1981 after completing 37 years of service. Subsequently, he died on 16.07.2018. The 1^st respondent claiming to be the first wife of the said Sri M.Peddanna and seeking for the benefit of family pension. Admittedly, suit in O.S.No.738 of 2019, pending on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nandyal was filed by the 1^st respondent along with her children against the appellants herein, disputing that they were not the legal heirs of the late Sri M.Peddanna.

¶47

4

¶48

As per the instructions placed by the official respondents before the learned Single Judge, it was stated that after the death of Sri M.Peddanna, one Ms. M.Padmavathi claiming to be the second wife of Sri M.Peddanna, had sent a registered post, claiming that she was entitled for 50% of the death benefits and pension along with the 1^st respondent herein.

¶49

The 1^st respondent herein filed W.P.No.22228 of 2025 questioning the action of the official respondents, in withholding her family pension, disputing her undisputed status as the legally wedded wife of late Sri M.Peddanna as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to Rule 50(5)(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980 and for a consequential direction to the respondents to forthwith sanction and release the family pension in her favour, together with arrears from 16.07.2018, in accordance with the last drawn pay of the late Sri M.Peddanna as revised under the applicable pay scales, along with interest thereon and to pass such other order or orders.

¶50

While hearing the said writ petition, a learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 03.09.2025, granted interim direction to the respondents to pay the family pension to the 1^st respondent with effect from July, 2018 as per Rule 50(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980 within a period of four (4) weeks from that day, pending further orders.

¶51

On perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 03.09.2025, it appears that, considering the fact that the issue with regard to

¶52

5

¶53

share in the death benefits of late Sri M.Peddanna can be decided only after the disposal of the pending suit and for the present, as there is no dispute with regard to the 1^st respondent herein being the legally wedded wife of the late Sri M.Peddanna, even as per the instructions furnished by the learned Assistant Government and signed instructions of the respondent No.2 therein, passed the said interim order.

¶54

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no dispute that the 1^st respondent herein is the legally wedded wife of the late Sri M.Peddanna, as the appellants herein failed to show any proof that the marriage between the said Sri M.Peddanna and the 1^st respondent has been broken down or any competent Court of law has passed a decree of divorce. As rightly observed by the learned Single Judge, all issues in this matter will be decided after the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.738 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nandyal.

¶55

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and as the main writ petition is still pending before the learned Single Judge, in our view it is not desirable and reasonable at present to consider the case of the appellants. Thus, we are not inclined to interfere into the reasoned order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, the appellants herein can file an implead petition and any other appropriate applications in the pending writ petition, if so advised, to agitate their grievances, if any.

¶56

6

¶57