Dismissed

P.Sundari v. The Director

Madras HC16 Dec 2022WP/1214/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition under Article 226 seeking to quash the rejection of family pension by the Fire & Rescue Department. The petitioner, a Hindu, claimed pension as the divorced wife of the deceased employee who died before the divorce decree. The court held that since the marriage was legally dissolved prior to death, the claim fails, distinguishing a case involving a Christian with judicial separation.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition for certiorari and quashing of the rejection order is dismissed. No costs.

P.Sundari Vs The Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED:16.12.2022

¶4

Coram

¶5

The HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

P.Sundari

.. Petitioner

1.The Director

¶11

Fire & Rescue Department,

¶12

Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶13

2.The Assistant Director,

¶14

Fire & Rescue Department, North West Zone, Vellore, Vellore District.

¶15

3.The District Officer, District Fire & Rescue Department, Tiruvannamalai.

¶16

.. Respondents

¶17

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the third respondent in his proceeding in No.Pa.Aa.No.05/2022 – Na.Ka.No.9268/Aa1/2006 dated 03.01.2022 and to quash the same.

¶18

For Petitioner : Ms.R.Kalaiyarasi

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader

¶20

1/5

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

ORDER

¶23

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

¶24

This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 03.01.2022 passed by the third respondent rejecting the petitioner's request for family pension on account of death of the deceased employee – L.Ponnusamy.

¶25

The petitioner claims that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee – L.Ponnusamy. Under the impugned order, family pension sought for by the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is not the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee. Admittedly, the petitioner is a Hindu and she has obtained divorce in H.M.O.P. No.55 of 1994 by order dated 17.10.1994 passed by the Sub Court, Thiruvannamalai on the ground of cruelty.

¶26

Admittedly, the petitioner's ex-husband L.Ponnusamy died on 30.10.2002 while he was in employment. Since the petitioner had obtained divorce even prior to the date of death of L.Ponnusamy, she cannot claim family pension though she may contend that she was

¶27

2/5

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

¶30

living with Ponnusamy till his death. The judgment of Madurai Bench of this Court dated 26.08.2020 in W.P. (MD) No.19997 of 2013 relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner does not have any bearing to the facts of the instant case. That was a case involving a Christian who had obtained judicial separation on the ground of adultery under the provisions of the Indian Divorce Act which is applicable to Christians. However, the petitioner is admittedly a Hindu and further the marriage with her husband has been legally dissolved by virtue of a Family Court decree. The third respondent, under the impugned order, has rightly rejected the petitioner's request for payment of family pension on account of death of the deceased employee L.Ponnusamy.

¶31

This Court does not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

16.12.2022

Index:Yes/No mmi

1.The Director Fire & Rescue Department,

¶36

3/5

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

¶39

Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶40

2.The Assistant Director, Fire & Rescue Department, North West Zone, Vellore, Vellore District.

¶41

3.The District Officer, District Fire & Rescue Department, Tiruvannamalai.

¶42

4/5

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

¶45

ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J.

¶46

mmi

¶47

W.P.No.1214 of 2022

¶48

16.12.2022

¶49

5/5

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P.Sundari v. The Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Sundari v. The Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Sivabalan Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

T.Ramachandran Vs The Principal Accountant General

B.Lalitha Vs The Secretary to the Government

R.Anbu Vs The Management of

G. Jayapal Vs The Joint Director of School Education

N.Selvam Vs The Chief Educational officer