K.Vijayalakshmi Vs the Joint Director

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 14.09.2022 in a time bound manner as expeditiously as possible within a short time as stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

¶14

Page No.1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.30393 of 2025

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mohanavadivelan For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, SGP, for R1 & R2 : Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap, St.C, for R3

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner has filed this Writ petition seeking direction to the 1^st respondent to consider his representation dated 14.09.2022, within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶20

Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the 1^st and 2^nd respondents, Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the 3^rd respondent. In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel on either side, this Writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶21

The case of the petitioner is that she being an eligible unmarried daughter of her father namely C.Kanagasabai, based on the certificate dated 06.10.2021 issued by the Tashildar, Kalasapakkam, applied for the family pension, following the death of her father. The petitioner had also sent

¶22

Page No.2 of 6

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.No.30393 of 2025

¶25

several letters to the 1^st and 2^nd respondents on various dates, seeking family pension, pursuant to which, though several correspondence have taken place between the petitioner and the 1^st and 2^nd respondents, the same was of no avail. Thereby, the petitioner issued a legal notice on 20.12.2022 and upon receipt of which, the 1^st respondent, vide reply dated 07.02.2023 stated that, based on the report which is to be received from the Tahsildar, Kalasapakkam, appropriate orders will be passed on the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2022. However, till date, no orders have been passed on the petitioner's representation. Hence, this Writ petition.

¶26

Though very many grounds have been raised, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the 1^st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2022 and pass appropriate orders, sanctioning family pension in favour of the petitioner.

¶27

Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 1^st and 2^nd respondents submitted that though the petitioner

¶28

Page No.3 of 6

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.30393 of 2025

¶31

claim that she sent a representation on 14.09.2022, no acknowledgment has been enclosed to prove the same. However, the learned counsel fairly submitted that, if a fresh representation is submitted by the petitioner, the same will be considered as per the rules and appropriate orders will be passed within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶32

In view of the aforesaid submissions, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the petitioner to send a fresh representation to the 1^st respondent seeking family pension and upon receipt of such representation, the 1^st respondent shall consider the same in terms of the Government orders regarding payment of family pension and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve (12) weeks thereafter, after hearing the petitioner and aggrieved persons, if any.

¶33

Page No.4 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.30393 of 2025

¶36