Disposed

M. Duraikannu, v. the Secretary to Govt.

Madras HC20 Aug 2015WP(MD)/1261/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court directed the respondents to consider fresh representations from petitioners seeking political pension as descendants of Maruthu Pandiyar Brothers within two weeks and pass orders on merits within eight weeks thereafter, disposing of the petitions without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to give fresh representations within two weeks and to pass orders on merits within eight weeks thereafter.

M. Duraikannu, Vs the Secretary to Govt. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 20.08.2015

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶6

W.P.(MD)Nos.1261 and 1262 of 2015

¶7

W.P.(MD)No.1261 of 2015: 1.M.Duraikannu

¶8

2.M.Thangam @ Thangammal

¶9

... Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public Department, (Pensions Political), Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶12

2.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 01.12.2014 and sanction the political pension for the petitioners by including the petitioners in the light of descendants of King Maruthu Pandiyar Brothers.

¶14

W.P.(MD)No.1262 of 2015:

¶15

1.V.Kesavan

¶16

2.V.Narayanan

¶17

3.V.Rajangam ... Petitioners

¶18

Vs.

¶19

1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public Department, (Pensions Political), Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶20

2.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. ... Respondents

¶21

PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 15.12.2014 and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ sanction the political pension for the petitioners by including the petitioners in the light of descendants of King Maruthu Pandiyar Brothers.

¶22

¶23

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Subash Babu For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan, G.A.

¶24

COMMON ORDER

¶25

The petitioners have come forward with these Writ Petitions to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 01.12.2014 and 15.12.2014 and to sanction the political pension for them by including their name in the light of descendants of King Maruthu Pandiyar Brothers.

¶26

2.The case of the petitioners is that on 19.07.2012, the Government of Tamil Nadu through G.O.Ms.No.1143, sanctioned an adhoc political pension of Rs.150/- per mensum to each family of the descendants of Maruthu Pandiar brothers of Sivaganga and the said G.O.is effected from the date of the said G.O.,issued and it is also mentioned in the said G.O., that the pension will be paid to the individuals by money order at Government expenses, as the case of the pension to freedom fighters. The petitioners also stated that the name of their elder sister viz.,Tmt.Pitchiammal has been found in the list of descendants in serial No.145PPO.11689, dated 04.12.1982. In this regard, the Thasildar recommended the petitioners' name by a proceedings in O.Mu.E1/970/1995, dated 09.02.1995. The petitioners made representations for sanctioning political pension to the 2^nd respondent. However, the same have not been considered so far. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court with the present Writ petitions to consider the representations of the petitioners.

¶27

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that it would be suffice if the representations of the petitioners are disposed of, by the 2^nd respondent, on merits and in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶28

4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the representations of the petitioners will be considered in accordance with law.

¶29

5.In view of the above, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioners in these Writ Petitions, the petitioners are directed to give fresh representations to the 2^nd respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the 2^nd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representations of the petitioners, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶31

¶32

With the above direction, these Writ Petitions stand disposed of. No costs.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

Assistant Registrar (T&P)

¶35

/True Copy/

¶36

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶37

¶38

1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public Department, (Pensions Political), Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶39

2.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶40

3.The District Collector, Sivagangai District,

¶41

Sivagangai.

¶42

2 CC TO M/S.M.SUBASH BABU, ADVOCATE IN SR NO. 48795, 48796

¶43

NBJ

¶44

TE/SK-SKN/SAR(J) 05/09/2015 3P/6C

¶45

W.P.(MD)Nos.1261 and 1262 of 2015

¶46

20.08.2015

¶47

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M. Duraikannu, v. the Secretary to Govt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Duraikannu, v. the Secretary to Govt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haji M. Saleem Baig, Vs the Chairman

Koppammal Vs the District Collector

C. Ponnusamy, Vs the District Collector- Cum -

Sengol Raj Vs Deputy Collector(Stamps)

S.Balasubramanian Vs the Supdt. of Police

N. Jegatheesan, Vs the Chief Commissioner of