Disposed

K.Riana v. The General Manager

Madras HC14 Dec 2022WP/2445/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation for family pension and benefits on merits within 12 weeks. The Court reserved opinion on the merits, noting the lack of a filed counter-affidavit from respondents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representation on merits within 12 weeks and to decide within fixed time frame; petitioner permitted to submit evidence within one week.

K.Riana Vs The General Manager — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 14.12.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

K.Raina

.. Petitioner

1.The General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram-III) Ltd. Thiruvannamalai Region Bye Pass Road, Vengikal Thiruvannamalai - 606 604.

¶11

The Administrator Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶12

.. Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶14

to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to pay Family pension, Gratuity, P.F and other terminal benefits to the petitioner for the service rendered by her husband Thiru.Kalimullah Khan.

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.T.Varadarajulu For Respondents : Ms.S.Pavithra for respondent 1 Mr.C.S.K.Sathish for respondent 2

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus seeking for a

¶21

direction to the respondents to pay family pension, gratuity, P.F and other terminal benefits to the petitioner for the services rendered by her husband Thiru.Karimullah Khan.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's husband died and she is entitled to receive family pension. According to her, she is the only legal heir of the deceased Thiru.Karimullah Khan, the employee and therefore, she is alone entitled to receive family pension. However, according to learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent Corporation, in the Service Register of Thiru.Karimullah Khan, apart from the petitioner, the names of his two children are shown as beneficiaries. According to the learned Standing Counsel, the petitioner

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

¶26

will have to obtain a succession certificate and only thereafter, the respondent Corporation will be able to consider the petitioner's request for family pension.

¶27

However, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the legal heirship certificate issued for the deceased Thiru.Karimullah Khan, the petitioner is disclosed as his only legal heir. Therefore, according to him, the family pension will have to be paid to the petitioner alone.

¶28

Admittedly, the petitioner had earlier given a representation on 09.03.2020 to the respondents, requesting them to grant family pension, gratuity, P.F and other terminal benefits for the services rendered by her husband Thiru.Karimullah Khan, who is now no more. The said representation was not considered by the respondents and only under those circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. Till date, counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents. Only if the counter affidavit is filed, the positive directions sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition can be considered. When the counter 3/6

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

¶31

affidavit has not been filed by the respondent Corporation, the only limited relief that can be granted to the petitioner is to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation referred to supra seeking for grant of family pension and other terminal benefits as prayed for in this writ petition, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶32

For the foregoing reasons, this Court, without expressing any opinion on merits of the petitioner's claim, directs the respondents to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law, on the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2020 seeking for grant of family pension, gratuity, P.F and other terminal benefits for the services rendered by her husband Thiru.Karimullah Khan, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is permitted to send a copy of all the documentary evidence in support of her contentions that she is alone entitled to receive the family pension for her deceased husband Thiru.Karimullah Khan within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

¶35

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶36

There will be no order as to costs.

¶37

14.12.2022

¶38

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order

¶39

drm/sp

¶40

¶41

1.The General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram-III) Ltd. Thiruvannamalai Region Bye Pass Road, Vengikal Thiruvannamalai - 606 604.

¶42

The Administrator Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶43

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

¶45

ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J.

(drm)

W.P.No.2445 of 2021

14.12.2022

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

K.Riana v. The General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Riana v. The General Manager

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. Kushal Raj Vs Manoj Kumar B Jain

K.Koperunchozhan Vs The Assistant Divisional Engineer

The Management Vs R.Boobalan

Dr.K.Prakasam, B.S.M.S. Vs The Director of Indian Medicine

C.Ravichandran Vs Tamil Nadu Minerals Limited

J. Abraham Paul Jayachandran Vs The Chief Educational Officer