Disposed

G.Natarajan, v. the Union of India, Rep. by

Madras HC6 Apr 2022WP/12754/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding the disbursement of a deceased wife's postal deposit exceeding Rs. 1 lakh, the Court held that Section Rule 87 of Post Office Savings Bank Manual mandates a Succession Certificate. The Court refused to direct disbursement without it but directed the petitioners to approach the Civil Court and granted an exclusion of limitation for the Writ proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to approach Civil Court for Succession Certificate; time spent excluded for limitation; respondent directed to disburse upon production.

G.Natarajan, Vs the Union of India, Rep. by — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.04.2022

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶5

Writ Petition No.12754 of 2012

¶6

G.Natarajan ... Petitioner

¶7

-Vs-

¶8

The Union Of India,

¶9

Rep. By its Secretary, The Ministry Of Communication And Information Technology, The Department of Posts, New Delhi-110 001.

¶10

The Post Master, Tambaram Head Post Office, Chennai-600 045. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records pertaining to the Order No. No/ MIS Claim/ 11-12/ dtd @ Tambaram the 12.7.2011 (dated) and quash the same and directing the 2nd Respondent to refund the deposited amount of Rs.2,00,000/- with pending interest of the Account No.82082 of the Petitioner's deceased wife N.Susila to the petitioner.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Gnanasundaram

¶13

For Respondents : Mr. A.Veeramani, CGC

¶14

Petitioner's wife deposited a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- ( Rupees two lakhs only) with the 2^nd Respondent. She died on 06.11.2007 without making any nomination to the deposit made by her. The petitioner and his two sons are the legal heirs of the deceased depositor and they produced Legal Heir Certificate, Death Certificate and all other required documents and sought for disbursal of the deposited amount.

¶15

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

¶16

However, the 2^nd Respondent had insisted on production of a Succession Certificate as per Rule 87 of Post Office Savings Bank Manual for settling the claim of the deceased person. As per the above Rule for the deposit exceeding Rs.1 lakh, production of Succession Certificate from the competent Court of Law is mandatory. It appears that she has deposited 2 lakhs, the legal position is admitted by the petitioner also. However, for the failure of the Post Office for not recording the nominee, it is claimed that they shall not be put to hardship.

¶17

Be that as it may, the Rule mandates that for disbursal of the deposit made by the deceased person, succession certificate is mandatory. In that event, it is the bounden duty of the claimant to produce the succession certificate. Court cannot direct the respondent to do an Act in violation of the Rules. Therefore, the Petitioner has to approach the competent Civil Court for getting Succession Certificate and get the disbursement of the money.

¶18

4. Accordingly,

¶19

(a) the Petitioner is given liberty to approach the competent Civil Court to get a succession certificate for the purpose of withdrawing the money deposited with the 2^nd Respondent along with accrued interest.

¶20

(b) the time spent on this Writ Petition stands excluded for the purpose of limitation.

¶21

¶22

5.The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. There shall be no order as to costs.

SD/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶27

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

¶28

sha/kpr

¶29

¶30

The Secretary Union Of India, The Ministry Of Communication And Information Technology, The Department of Posts, New Delhi-110 001.

¶31

The Post Master, Tambaram Head Post Office, Chennai-600 045.

¶32

+1cc to M/s.K.Gnanasundaram, Advocate Sr.24626

¶33

W.P.No.12754 of 2012

¶34

kj[co] srg 30/05/2022

¶35

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

G.Natarajan, v. the Union of India, Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Natarajan, v. the Union of India, Rep. by

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

S.Bala Janaki, Vs the Manager

Dr.K.S.Krishnan Unni Vs 1.THE Govt., of India, Rep.by

J.Letchumanan Vs the Chairman

Sri Piraliamman Temple Vs the Assistant Settlement

Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable Tv Vs the Competition Commission of

N.Balasubramanian, Vs the Secretary to Government