Writ petition challenging the rejection of an application for Maruthupandiar Brothers Descendents Pension. Court held the impugned order was mechanical and not considering relevant documents, setting it aside and directing reconsideration.
Impugned order set aside. Directions to consider application afresh within twelve weeks. No 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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.10.2016 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Writ Petition (MD) No.20222 of 2015 and M.P(MD)No.2 of 2015
1.V.Kanaga 2.C.Maragatham 3.K.Rasu @ Rajeswari
... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep by Secretary to Government, Public (Political Pension 2) Department, Secretariat, Fort St., George, Chennai 9.
2.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
3.The Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.G2/15042/2015, dated 15.06.2015, and quash the same consequentially to direct the respondents to sanction Maruthupandiar Brothers Descendents Pension with effect from the date of application of the petitioners namely (1) V.Kanaga, W/o.N.Veerapandian (2) C.Maragatham, W/o.K.Chellam and (3)K.Rasu @ Rajeswari, W/0.Karuppusamy individually within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Mahendran For Respondents : Mr.J.Gunaseelanmuthiah, Government Advocate.
ORDER
Challenging the order passed by the second respondent, the District Collector, dated 15.06.2015 rejecting the petitioners application for grant of Maruthupandiar Brothers Descendents Pension, the present writ petition has been filed.
2.According to the petitioners, earlier, the Government given financial assistance to the descendents of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Maruthupandiar Brothers by issuing G.O.Ms.No.1143, Public (Political A) Department, dated 19.07.1982. Since the petitioners are also the descendents of the Maruthupandiar Brothers and the
2
petitioners close relatives have also granted pension, the petitioners applied for the same. But the respondents without considering the certificates produced by the petitioners rejected their application stating that their names did not find place in the Government Order, dated 19.04.1982. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.
3.The respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that a committee was constituted by the Government to finalise the details of descendents and sanctioned pension by G.O.Ms.No.1143, dated 19.07.1982 to the persons who have mentioned as descendents and no other person can be sanctioned except eligible person found out by the committee. The names of the petitioners did not find place in the recommendation of committee and therefore, they are not entitled for the pension.
4.According to the petitioners, the close relatives of the petitioners namely, Kalyani and Kasthuri Kannan were granted pension following the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD) Nos.7234 and 735 of 2009, dated 13.10.2009. The petitioners seem to have placed all the relevant records to that effect before the respondents. However, the second respondent without considering the records produced by the petitioners, the impugned order has been passed rejecting the application of the petitioners stating that their names did not find place in the Government Order, dated 19.07.1982.
5.In the above circumstances, the impugned order has been passed without considering all the relevant documents filed by the petitioners and the respondent rejected the application mechanically and therefore, impugned order passed by the second respondent is set aside. The second respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioners afresh considering the materials placed by the petitioner and pass suitable orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, M.P(MD)No.2 of 2015 is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(writs)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Public (Political Pension 2) Department, Secretariat, Fort St., George,
3
2.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
3.The Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
+1cc to Mr.K.Mahendran,Advocate Sr.No.60185
Writ Petition (MD) No.20222 of 2015 and M.P(MD)No.2 of 2015 06.10.2016 sms rum/26.12.2016/3p/5c
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order rejecting the petitioners application for pension was passed mechanically without considering relevant documents filed.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to the Maruthupandiar Brothers Descendents Pension based on relatives granted pension previously.
Whether the respondents should reconsider the application afresh within a stipulated time.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V.Kanaga
C.Maragatham
K.Rasu @ Rajeswari
The State of Tamil Nadu
The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District
The Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk
V. Bharathidasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court