The petitioner claimed family pension arrears for his mother, arguing entitlement before attaining the age of 25. The Court dismissed the writ petition due to the petitioner having already surpassed the age limit and lack of evidentiary documents for the claim.
No relief granted. Writ petition dismissed without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:-
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/14TH POUSHA, 1937
W.P.(C).No.39876 of 2003 (V)
PETITIONER(S):-
VIJESH VARGHESE, KOMBARAKARAN HOUSE, POTTA PO., CHALAKUDY - 680 722.
BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN.
RESPONDENT(S):-
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SUNITHA VINOD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
W.P.(C) NO.39876 OF 2003-V
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 7.2.2003 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-
--------------------------------------NIL.
Vku/[ TRUE COPY ]
K. Vinod Chandran, J
W.P.(C).No.39876 of 2003-V
Dated this the 04th day of January, 2016.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved with the fact that the
petitioner has not been paid the family pension due to him from 23.10.2010 till 16.05.2003.
mother, while working as Upper Primary School Assistant in an aided school, died on 08.09.1994. Family pension was sanctioned to the petitioner's father, who re-married on 22.02.1995. Hence, from 23.02.1995 the petitioner's elder brother was sanctioned family pension and he was drawing the same till 22.10.2000, when the petitioner's brother attained 25 years of age. The petitioner claims that from the next day onwards, he was entitled to family pension till he attained the age of 25 years.
WP(C).No.39876 of 2003 - 2 -
the writ petition; nor is the application produced. In any event, the 2nd respondent has issued a letter by Exhibit P1, with copy enclosed to the petitioner, indicating that the non-employment certificate of the petitioner has not been enclosed. The petitioner contends that the petitioner had re-submitted the non-employment certificate in October, 2002. However, Exhibit P1 communication is dated 07.02.2003. The petitioner has also not produced the non-employment certificate which is said to have been produced by him before the 2nd respondent. In such circumstance, despite the fact that the Government has not filed any counter affidavit, this Court does not find any reason to grant any relief to the petitioner, especially at this distance of time when the petitioner has attained 25 years of age, long back in the year 2003.
The writ petition would stand dismissed. No costs.
Sd/K.Vinod Chandran Judge.
vku/-
[ true copy ]
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, who had attained the age of 25 years prior to the hearing, is entitled to family pension arrears.
Whether late-filed documents justifying the claim warrant granting relief given the long delay.
Vijesh Varghese
State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to Government, General Education Department
The Accountant General, Office of the Accountant General, Trivandrum
The Deputy Director of Education
K. Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
