Smt. Chenna Lakshmi@ Kasimkota Lakshmi, Vs The Union of India

SMT. CHENNA LAKSHMI@ KASIMKOTA LAKSHMI,, W/O. LATE DALIBABU.AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCHOUSE WIFE R/O.D.NO.4-97, RELLI STREET, DHARLAPUDI VILLAGE, S. RAYAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS MINISTRY OF PORTS, SHIPPING AND WATERWAYS NEW DELHI.

¶15

THE VISAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

SMT CHENNA SATYA SREE, W/O.LATE DALIBABU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, R/O.D.NO.20-47-7, DOWN RELLI STREET, AVN COLLEGE ROAD VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not releasing the death benefits of the deceased Chenna Dalibabu in view of the Lok Adalat Award dated 22.04.2018 in

¶19

2

¶20

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.2769 of 2025

¶21

FCOP.No.446/2016 in favour of the petitioner as illegal. arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to release the death benefits of the deceased Chenna Dalibabu in favour of the petitioner and pas

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

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 may be pleased to grant interim direction directing the 2^"^ respondent to release the death benefits of the deceased Chenna Dalibabu in favour of the petitioner forthwith in terms of the Lokadalat Award dated 22.04.2018 in FCOP.No.446/2016, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pas

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.JOSEPH PREM KUMAR KUMMARIKUNTA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.JAMPANA SRIKANTH

¶28

2.P SRI RAM

¶29

¶30

3

¶31

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.2769 of 2025

¶32

The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

¶33

The petitioner herein and the 3^rd respondent were both married to Sri Dalibabu, who was working in the Visakhapatnam Port Trust, who is arrayed as the 2^nd respondent in the present Writ Petition.

¶34

Sri Dalibabu, is said to have passed away, on 05.09.2014. There was a dispute between the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent over the person, who is entitled to the estate of late Sri Dalibabu, including his pensionary benefits etc.. These disputes are said to have been resolved, by way of a Joint Memo, filed in F.C.O.P. No.446 of 2016 on the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam. The said terms of compromise have been referred to Lok Adalat, which passed an Award, on 22.04.2018. The terms recorded in the Joint Memo of Compromise, state that the pensionary benefits and other service benefits were to be given to the petitioner herein. However, the 2^nd respondent – Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam, had refused to release pensionary benefits, on the ground that, the 2^nd respondent – Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam, was not a signatory to the said award and that, it was a party before the Family Court, Visakhapatnam.

¶35

Aggrieved by the refusal of the 2^nd respondent to release the said pensionary benefits, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition.

¶36

4

¶37

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.2769 of 2025

¶38

Heard Sri Joseph Prem Kumar Kummarikunta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jampana Srikanth, learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent and Sri P. Sri Ram, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶39

As the learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent had no objection for the release of the pensionary benefits to the petitioner, it would be appropriate to direct such release.

¶40

Sri P. Sri Ram, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent, has also placed before this Court, a Memo, filed on behalf of the 2^nd respondent. In this Memo, it was stated that the 2^nd respondent has no objection to release the benefits, if any, to be paid to the petitioner.

¶41

In these circumstances, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to ascertain and crystallize the dues payable on account of the pensionary and other benefits to late Sri Dalibabu and to pay the same to the petitioner, within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of this Order. However, it shall be subject to the condition that the 3^rd respondent shall give a No Objection to the 2^nd respondent – Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam.

¶42