This writ petition sought to direct the Chennai Port Trust to include the petitioner's wife in the pension payment order. The Court held that the petitioner was directed to submit a fresh representation enclosing the certified copies of the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 30 of 2020 dated 30.04.2021 before the 3rd respondent.
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.
W.P.No.30063 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
W.P.No. 30063 of 2019
K.Kuppuraj(Deceased)
sole petitioner vide order dated 10.11.2022
made in WMP.No.27234/2022 in W.P.No.30063/2019) ... Petitioner
Versus
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, prays to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records pertaining to the order dated 06.10.2018 in A4/0252/2018/T(CHD) issued by the 3rd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the
W.P.No.30063 of 2019
respondents to include the petitioner's wife's name Mrs.K.Amaravathy in the petitioner's Pension Payment Order(PPO)book No.12985 as per regulation No.46(ii)(a) of Chennai Port Trust(Pension) Regulations, 1987.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rajkumar Pandian For Respondents : Mrs.Madhuri Donti Reddy
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertaining to the order dated 06.10.2018 in A4/0252/2018/T(CHD) issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to include the petitioner's wife's name (Mrs.K.Amaravathy) in the petitioner's Pension Payment Order(PPO)book No.12985 as per regulation No.46(ii)(a) of Chennai Port Trust(Pension) Regulations, 1987.
to 5 being his legal representatives were substituted in his place in and by order dated 10.11.2022 in W.M.P.No.27234 of 2022. According to the petitioner, the 2nd petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and another lady Amaravathi sought for her name to be included as the wife of
W.P.No.30063 of 2019
the petitioner. In fact, the proceedings were also initiated by the said Amaravathi claiming to be wife of the petitioner in M.C.No.1027 of 1979. The said maintenance case was dismissed by order dated 16.04.1980 holding that the said Amaravathi did not establish that she was the legally wedded wife and consequently, she was not entitled to claim maintenance from the petitioner. Despite referring relevant documents and the order passed by the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate Court, the respondents passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to furnish a competent Court's Order after the year 2006 (i.e.,after the date of his retirement) to establish identity of his wife.
W.P.No.30063 of 2019
4/6
W.P.No.30063 of 2019
16.06.2023
Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes Speaking/non speaking order nr
To
W.P.No.30063 of 2019
P.B.BALAJI, J., nr
W.P.No. 30063 of 2019
16.06.2023
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can be directed to submit a certified copy of a judgment obtained to establish the legitimacy of a claimant's status as a spouse for pension purposes.
Whether the claim of a person to be the spouse of a deceased employee can be resolved by a judgment of the District Munsif Court declaring her as the legitimate wife of the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Justice P.B. Balaji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
